K-12 Special Education Evaluation
Implementation Guide
Second Edition: November 10, 2022
Issued by the Vermont Agency of Education
This guide covers rule changes to State Board of
Education Rule 2360 that take effect July 1, 2023
Special Education Evaluation
Implementation Guide (August 3, 2022)
revised November10, 2022
Page 2 of 101
Table of Contents
SECTION 1: OVERVIEW OF THE IMPLEMENTATION GUIDE ................................... 5
1.1 Purpose of this Guide ............................................................................................................................... 5
1.2 Audience - Whom is this Guide for? ...................................................................................................... 6
1.3 Anatomy of the Guide .............................................................................................................................. 6
1.4 Contributions and Inputs to this Guide ................................................................................................. 9
SECTION 2: UNDERSTANDING THE BIG PICTURE .................................................... 10
2.1 Free and Appropriate Public Education (FAPE) ................................................................................. 10
2.2 Child Find................................................................................................................................................. 10
2.3 Least Restrictive Environment .............................................................................................................. 11
2.4 The Special Education Initial Evaluation Process ............................................................................... 12
2.5 The Reevaluation Process ....................................................................................................................... 14
2.6 The Role of Parents ................................................................................................................................. 15
2.7 Rule Changes Explained ........................................................................................................................ 16
2.8 Conclusion ................................................................................................................................................ 18
SECTION 3: PROVIDING A SYSTEM OF SUPPORTS FOR ALL STUDENTS ......... 19
3.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................................. 19
3.2 Using Data to Identify Students in Need of Support ......................................................................... 20
3.3 Providing Supports ................................................................................................................................. 21
3.4 Early and Accurate Identification of a Possible Disability ................................................................ 22
3.5 Determining When to Make a Referral ................................................................................................ 23
3.6 Conclusion ................................................................................................................................................ 24
SECTION 4: THE INITIAL REFERRAL ............................................................................... 26
4.1 Introduction to Initial Referral .............................................................................................................. 26
4.2 Request for Evaluation ........................................................................................................................... 26
4.3 Determining Next Steps ......................................................................................................................... 27
4.3.1 Convening the EPT .................................................................................................. Error! Bookmark not defined.
4.3.2 Requesting Consent ................................................................................................. Error! Bookmark not defined.
4.3.3 Denying the Request for Evaluation ....................................................................................................................... 29
4.4 Consent, Timelines, and Documentation ............................................................................................. 30
4.4.1 Parental Consent........................................................................................................................................................ 30
4.4.2 Timelines .................................................................................................................................................................... 31
4.4.3 Documentation .......................................................................................................................................................... 31
4.5 Conclusion ................................................................................................................................................ 32
SECTION 5: THE ASSESSMENT PROCESS ...................................................................... 33
5.1 Introduction to Assessment Process ..................................................................................................... 33
5.2 Evaluation Planning Team ..................................................................................................................... 34
5.3 Assessment Planning .............................................................................................................................. 34
Special Education Evaluation
Implementation Guide (August 3, 2022)
revised November10, 2022
Page 3 of 101
5.3.1 Clarify the Suspected Disability .............................................................................................................................. 35
5.3.2 Identify Areas to Assess ........................................................................................................................................... 36
5.3.3 Decide Who Will Assess and What Batteries Will be Used ............................................................................ 40
5.3.4 Assessment Planning for Students Suspected of Having SLD ............................................................................ 40
5.4 Conducting and Reviewing Assessments ............................................................................................ 42
5.5 Timelines, Consent, and Documentation ............................................................................................. 45
5.6 Conclusion ................................................................................................................................................ 46
SECTION 6: ELIGIBILITY DETERMINATION ................................................................ 47
6.1 Introduction to Eligibility Determination ............................................................................................ 47
6.2 Reconvening the EPT .............................................................................................................................. 51
6.3 Eligibility Criterion One: Disability Determination ........................................................................... 52
6.3.1 Specific Learning Disability ..................................................................................................................................... 59
6.3.2 Deaf-Blindness ........................................................................................................................................................... 62
6.4 Eligibility Criterion Two: Adverse Effect Determination .................................................................. 63
6.5 Eligibility Criterion Three: Special Education Determination .......................................................... 65
6.6 Timelines, Consent, and Documentation ............................................................................................. 67
6.7 Students Found Ineligible for Special Education Services ................................................................ 69
6.7.1 Section 504 Plan ......................................................................................................................................................... 70
6.7.2 Parental Rights to Respond to Ineligibility Determination .................................................................................. 71
6.7.3 Independent Educational Evaluation ..................................................................................................................... 71
6.8 Conclusion ................................................................................................................................................ 72
SECTION 7: PLANNING FOR SERVICES ......................................................................... 74
7.1 Introduction to Planning for Services ................................................................................................... 74
7.2 Planning for Services in the IEP ............................................................................................................ 74
7.3 Key Tips for Planning of Support ......................................................................................................... 75
7.4 Timelines, Consents and Documentation ............................................................................................ 76
7.5 Conclusion ................................................................................................................................................ 77
SECTION 8: REEVALUATION ............................................................................................. 78
8.1 Overview of the Reevaluation Process ................................................................................................. 78
8.2 Assessment Process ................................................................................................................................. 79
8.3 Eligibility Determination ........................................................................................................................ 81
8.4 Planning for Services .............................................................................................................................. 81
8.5 Timelines, Consents and Documentation ............................................................................................ 82
8.6 Conclusion ................................................................................................................................................ 83
SECTION 9: BIBLIOGRAPHY ............................................................................................... 84
SECTION 10: APPENDICES .................................................................................................. 86
Table of Figures
Special Education Evaluation
Implementation Guide (August 3, 2022)
revised November10, 2022
Page 4 of 101
Figure 4-1: Sample Initial Referral and Evaluation Timeline............................................................. 31
Figure 4-2: Alternative Initial Referral and Evaluation Timeline ...................................................... 31
Figure 5-1: Components of Assessment Planning ............................................................................... 35
Figure 5-2: Three Areas of Student Functioning .................................................................................. 36
Figure 6-1: Eligibility Criteria for All Disability Categories Except SLD and Deaf-Blindness ...... 49
Figure 6-2: Eligibility Criteria for Specific Learning Disability ......................................................... 50
Figure 6-3: Eligibility Criteria for Deaf-Blindness ............................................................................... 51
Figure 6-4: Criterion Three in Eligibility Determination .................................................................... 65
Table of Tables
Table 2-1: Overview of Evaluation-Related Rule Changes ................................................................ 17
Table 7-1: Connections between Evaluation and IEP Processes ........................................................ 76
Table 8-1: Reevaluation Assessment Planning Steps .......................................................................... 79
Table 8-2: Connection Between Reevaluation Process and IEP Components ................................. 82
Special Education Evaluation
Implementation Guide (August 3, 2022)
revised November10, 2022
Page 5 of 101
SECTION 1: OVERVIEW OF THE IMPLEMENTATION GUIDE
1.1 Purpose of this Guide
The Vermont Agency of Education (AOE) is committed to providing all Local Educational
Agencies (LEAs) with research-based, actionable resources to support the implementation of
high-quality Special Education services statewide. In accordance with this commitment, and in
consideration of the updates to the Special Education rules, the AOE has developed this
Implementation Guide (Guide) to provide practitioners and administrators with a common
resource to support the development and/or refinement of a comprehensive Evaluation Process
for Special Education.
The details of this guide are dependent on the rule changes that, due to legislative action, take
place over the course of several years. While some rules go into effect on July 1, 2022, the
remaining, which include rules related to Adverse Effect, Specific Learning Disability, and the
addition of Functional Skills as a basic skill area, will go into effect on July 1, 2023. The
processes and procedures contained within this guide include all changes going into effect as of
July of 2023. This guide is being released prior to that date in order to give school districts,
teams, and professionals an opportunity to prepare for that implementation date.
The Evaluation Process includes the discrete planning and implementation actions that help
LEAs determine if a student is eligible for Special Education. The Guide sets forth
recommendations for quality implementation of State regulations, including highlighting the
AOE resources related to the Evaluation Process, with an emphasis on areas impacted by the VT
SBE 2300 rule changes.
The Guide will focus on the Evaluation Process for school-aged students ages six through 21.
An Early Childhood Special Education (ECSE) evaluation guide will be forthcoming for
students ages 3 through 5. The ECSE evaluation guide will be a companion document to this
guide and will specify ECSE evaluation processes and procedures including Child Find,
transition from ECSE to school-aged services, ECSE eligibility, and more.
A comprehensive and well-planned Evaluation Process is essential to ensuring timely,
responsive, and consistent support for students who are believed to need Special Education
services. The Evaluation Process can be an opportunity to determine appropriate supports for a
student who needs educational services that are different from grade-level peers, potentially
changing the educational trajectory for a student who may be at risk of becoming disconnected.
Because the Evaluation Process involves many community partners and steps, the Guide breaks
Special Education Evaluation
Implementation Guide (August 3, 2022)
revised November10, 2022
Page 6 of 101
down the process into its component parts and offers practical solutions and supports for
setting up effective systems in each LEA.
1.2 Audience - Whom is this Guide for?
The Guide was designed to support both practitioners (e.g., teachers, special educators, school
psychologists, related service providers, etc.) and administrators serving school-aged students
ages six through 21 in the implementation of an effective Evaluation Process for determining
Special Education eligibility. Practitioners should use the content and tools in the Guide as
resources in their day-to-day practice for implementing a robust Special Education Evaluation
Process. For administrators, the Guide offers strategic support for ensuring school and district-
wide systems are in place to implement these practices across settings. It is recommended that
all partners in the Evaluation Process review the Guide to better understand the role they play
in ensuring practices are implemented effectively.
1.3 Anatomy of the Guide
Content and Format: The Guide consists of strategies, tools, and other resources to assist in
both planning for and implementing a comprehensive Evaluation Process for Special Education
services. It is organized to first reflect the steps of an Initial Evaluation Process for school-aged
students ages six through 21.
Following a detailed description of each of the steps of the Initial Evaluation Process, the Guide
concludes by discussing how the Reevaluation Process differs. While the Guide can be read
cover-to-cover, it has also been designed as a resource to access relevant sections as needed.
Note about Equity: Despite movement in the right direction, our country’s educational
systems continue to underserve students with disabilities. As a result, both academic and non-
academic outcomes for this historically marginalized group have lagged when compared to
their peers without disabilities. (Fuchs, 2015) (Mishkind, 2014)
That said, quality, data-driven evaluation processes help ensure that all students’ needs are
being met while also being mindful to not perpetuate patterns of over or misidentification that
disproportionately impact students in marginalized communities.
Implementing an Evaluation Process that is clear, consistent, and based on evidence helps to
ensure that each student in need of more support is given an equitable opportunity to get
what they need to be successful in school.
Special Education Evaluation
Implementation Guide (August 3, 2022)
revised November10, 2022
Page 7 of 101
Design Features: The Guide integrates various design features to highlight opportunities for
application of ideas to practice. Those features are outlined in the table below.
Implementation Guide Design Features
Symbol
Description
Practice Resources
There are tools and tables that support additional knowledge and skill-
building of practitioners and school leaders.
Real World Scenarios
Real world and practice-based scenarios have been added to provide
examples of concepts or ideas in the field.
Schoolwide Planning Tips
Content that has implications for schoolwide planning is signified by use of
the schoolwide planning symbol. These ideas may be particularly relevant
for administrators.
Rule Change References
This icon signifies that the Guide is referencing an area that has recently
been updated in statewide rules.
Research References
Research and links to studies that further explain certain concepts and ideas
provide additional context when applicable.
Note about…
Text Box Notes
Additional context and notes are highlighted throughout the Guide in gray
boxes.
Special Education Evaluation
Implementation Guide (August 3, 2022)
revised November10, 2022
Page 8 of 101
Symbol
Description
CHECKLIST
LEA Checklists
At the end of every section, the Guide includes a checklist that summarizes
key lessons and serves as an implementation benchmark for LEA leaders
In addition to the features outlined above, the Guide also includes the following elements to
increase usability:
Appendix: This section at the end of the Guide consists of additional tools and tables with
information that supports both knowledge and skill-building. The Appendix
section is
referenced throughout the Guide.
Glossary of Terms: To make the Guide applicable across audiences, a glossary that defines key
terms related to the Evaluation Process has been included in Appendix A
of the Guide.
Links to AOE Resources: To align content with relevant AOE resources, particular content,
tools, and forms are hyperlinked throughout the document. Forms are referenced by number as
well as name throughout.
1
A list of all AOE resources is also linked in Appendix D.
Lists of Additional Resources: Where appropriate, the Guide links to resources, studies, or
information from other organizations that may be of interest to practitioners. Sources for these
references are also listed in the Bibliography
at the end of the Guide.
1
Note that AOE forms contain information required by State regulations to be documented by LEAs;
however, the AOE does not require these specific forms to be used.
Note about Language: As Special Education has many specific terms and terminology, the
Guide seeks to align its terms with common definitions used throughout the state and to
clarify how it’s using terms to create a shared understanding across LEAs. Therefore, terms
that are used specifically in the Guide are both capitalized throughout the Guide and defined
in the Glossary.
Special Education Evaluation
Implementation Guide (August 3, 2022)
revised November10, 2022
Page 9 of 101
1.4 Contributions and Inputs to this Guide
The Guide was developed with the strategic contributions from key AOE community partners
and experts in the field. Members of AOE leadership provided oversight of the resource
development process, as well as providing input and feedback at key intervals.
Additional design and content input was gathered from experts, practitioners, and leaders
across Vermont through the facilitation of numerous focus groups, office hours, and input
gathering sessions.
Lastly, as part of the content development process, State-level guidance documents and
exemplars, as well as research on the topic of evaluation, were reviewed to align with
promising national and evidence-based practices. Thank you to everyone who has provided
input throughout the development of the Guide.
Special Education Evaluation
Implementation Guide (August 3, 2022)
revised November10, 2022
Page 10 of 101
SECTION 2: UNDERSTANDING THE BIG PICTURE
2.1 Free and Appropriate Public Education (FAPE)
The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) is a federal statute that mandates the
minimum requirements that must be met when providing education to eligible students with
disabilities.
2
In addition to IDEA, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 also protects the
rights of individuals with disabilities. Like IDEA, Section 504 applies to students with
disabilities. Unlike IDEA however, the Section 504 has implications beyond just school settings,
protecting any individual with disabilities from discriminatory practices including equitable
access to participate in public programs and services - including school. Students can receive
legally mandated services and support in school via Special Education under IDEA or via
accommodations under Section 504.
Under the law, eligible students with disabilities (age 3 through 21) are entitled to a Free and
Appropriate Public Education (FAPE). FAPE is defined as Special Education and related
services that are provided for free by the LEA, that meet state standards, are aligned to
appropriate education in the State involved, and are provided in conformity with an
Individualized Education Program (IEP). An IEP is a legal document that sets forth a student’s
present levels of performance, annual goals, and services or supports that enable the student to
advance toward attaining those goals. Whether FAPE has been delivered to a student is a highly
individualized, case-by-case analysis that often involves examining whether an LEA followed
the law and its own processes for developing and implementing an IEP. FAPE must be
delivered in non-academic and extra-curricular activities in the manner necessary to afford
children with disabilities equal opportunity for participation in those activities. Another key
discussion that often gets included in the analysis of FAPE is the Evaluation Process. For more
information about FAPE, see the Vermont Special Education Procedures and Practices Manual
.
2.2 Child Find
As a critical component of FAPE, IDEA requires that LEAs locate, identify, and evaluate all
students with disabilities who may need services. This requirement is known as Child Find.
3
An
LEA’s responsibility for Child Find applies to all children from birth to 21 and includes children
enrolled in public, private, or home study settings, as well as students who are experiencing
homelessness, in state custody, and others. Child Find applies to students with an identified
2
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, 20 U.S.C. § 1414 (2004).
3
34 C.F.R. § 300.111.
Special Education Evaluation
Implementation Guide (August 3, 2022)
revised November10, 2022
Page 11 of 101
disability or developmental delay and students suspected of having a disability or
developmental delay.
LEAs are responsible for establishing and implementing a comprehensive Child Find system
including identifying students among their own student population who may not be making
academic, behavioral, or social-emotional progress in the school setting due to a possible
disability. The Child Find system must also account for identifying eligible students with
disabilities who are passing from grade to grade, but still require Special Education services to
make progress.
Examples of metrics for locating students with potential disabilities include:
• A pattern of declining grades.
• A pattern of declining progress on standardized assessments.
• A lack of adequate progress following intervention.
• A lack of adequate progress from accommodations provided in a Section 504 Plan.
• An increase in behavioral or disciplinary referrals.
• Signs of depression, withdrawal, inattention.
• An increase in absences (school or class-specific).
• A history of hospitalization and/or illness.
• A record of a psychiatric diagnosis.
LEAs have implemented differing processes (such as Child Find training for staff, strategic
implementation of Universal Screeners, posting information for parents, holding workshops to
inform parents about their rights) to ensure their Child Find obligations are met, but the bottom
line is that if a school employee knows or suspects that a child has a disability, they have an
affirmative duty to act on the child’s behalf.
2.3 Least Restrictive Environment
Per IDEA, LEAs must ensure that, to the maximum extent appropriate to meet a student’s
needs, children with disabilities are educated with their general education peers in the school
the student would attend if the student did not have a disability. This concept is called Least
Restrictive Environment (LRE).
4
This responsibility applies to students in public or private institutions or other care facilities. A
student’s IEP will specify the extent to which this is possible based on the student’s program,
4
34 C.F.R. § 300.114.
Special Education Evaluation
Implementation Guide (August 3, 2022)
revised November10, 2022
Page 12 of 101
supplementary aids and services, or other related services. A student with a disability should
not be removed from the general education environment unless the nature or severity of the
disability is such that education in general education classes with the use of supplementary aids
and services cannot be achieved satisfactorily. In that case, the IEP Team may determine that
placement in a more restrictive setting (e.g., special class, special school, etc.) is appropriate.
2.4 The Special Education Initial Evaluation Process
It is important to set the context of the Evaluation Process amidst the other supports and
services LEAs deliver to students. A System of supports ensures that all students are provided
interventions and support throughout their educational experience. Ideally, students are
proactively identified as needing moderate to more intensive support through the analysis of
progress data captured in the classroom and through their participation in tiered support
systems. Consequently, educators may be able to detect early signs and gather evidence to
support the suspicion of a potential disability. These supports are available to all students as
needed and are not a pathway to Special Education.
When it comes to Special Education, IDEA requires that LEAs use a variety of assessment tools
and strategies to gather relevant functional, developmental, and academic information,
including information provided by the parent, to assess (1) whether the student is a student
with a disability and (2) the educational needs of the student – via the Evaluation Process.
Special Education Evaluation
Implementation Guide (August 3, 2022)
revised November10, 2022
Page 13 of 101
When this process is completed for a school-aged student who is not already receiving Special
Education services, it is referred to as the Initial Evaluation Process. The Initial Evaluation
Process includes the following components briefly described below (and illustrated in the image
above):
Initial Referral: Initial Referral is the formal Request for Evaluation by a parent, an educator, an
administrator, or other community partner for a student to receive a comprehensive Special
Education evaluation and the immediate next steps taken regarding that request. Educators
should ensure that sufficient data exists to paint a meaningful picture of a student’s needs to set
up the rest of the Evaluation Process for success, but lack of access to that data or completion of
any intervention prior to referral is not a rationale for delaying a student evaluation. Parental
consent is typically required to move forward with the Evaluation Process.
Assessment Process: The Assessment Process includes the steps necessary to gather evidence
that will be used to determine Special Education eligibility, and includes but is not limited to,
psychological, educational, social history, and medical assessments. In addition, if an
Evaluation Planning Team (EPT) believes a student is potentially in need of related services,
assessments are performed in those areas as well. Assessments are administered and results
analyzed by the appropriately trained clinician or service provider.
Eligibility Determination: Assessment reports, as well as data collected during the delivery of
a System of supports, if appropriate, provide foundational evidence for the EPT to use to
determine a student’s eligibility for Special Education services. During this phase of the
Evaluation Process, the EPT considers Special Education eligibility by looking at the following
three criteria, whether:
• The student has a disability according to the established criteria in the IDEA;
5
• The student’s disability has resulted in an Adverse Effect on the student’s educational
performance (except for SLD and Deaf-Blindness); and
• The student needs Special Education services to make progress in school.
Planning for Services: Planning for Services is the link between the Evaluation Process and the
IEP creation process. During Planning for Services, the EPT designates the type of services the
5
While students who are aged six through eight may enter school with an IEP containing the disability
category of Developmental Delay, school-aged students going through the Initial Evaluation Process are
not able to qualify for eligibility for Special Education with this disability. Therefore, practitioners and
administrators in school-aged settings should be aware of and knowledgeable about this disability but
will not be required to assess for it in the Initial Evaluation Process.
Special Education Evaluation
Implementation Guide (August 3, 2022)
revised November10, 2022
Page 14 of 101
student would benefit from and sends this information to the IEP Team in its final report. The
IEP Team then specifies the student’s program and services in the IEP.
2.5 The Reevaluation Process
Because the Reevaluation Process is similar to the Initial Evaluation Process, the Guide focuses
on explaining where these two processes are different rather than repeating the content. For
example, during the Reevaluation process the student is already receiving Special Education
services so the Reevaluation may be limited to a file review and an Initial Referral is not
necessary.
It is the responsibility of each LEA to ensure that a Reevaluation of each student with an IEP is
conducted on a regular basis. A Reevaluation must occur at least once every three years
(referred to as the Mandated Three-Year Reevaluation Process), unless the parent and the LEA
agree that a Reevaluation is unwarranted (Form 8). A Reevaluation can be requested prior to
the three-year requirement but should not be requested more than once annually absent
extenuating circumstances.
Special Education Evaluation
Implementation Guide (August 3, 2022)
revised November10, 2022
Page 15 of 101
2.6 The Role of Parents
Family participation in a child’s education is critically important. Engaging a student’s family in
their learning process can help strengthen the effectiveness and quality of the supports they
receive – whether in a System of supports or through Special Education services. EPTs and IEP
teams are tasked with making educational decisions for students throughout the Evaluation
Process and families offer several meaningful insights and supports including:
• A unique perspective on their child and additional insights on student strengths,
weaknesses, preferences, and history beyond school.
• Help to make connections between learning environments outside of school and
observations and data from the school setting.
• Reinforcing strategies implemented in school at home to support continued success.
Family partnership provides connection and continuity throughout a child’s educational career
and often can be the consistent point of reference to support the many transitions a student can
make in their education including across school settings, between districts and into post-
secondary programs.
Further information in how LEAs can support and include family and parental voice can be
found in the Ensuring Meaningful Participation
resource.
Special Education Evaluation
Implementation Guide (August 3, 2022)
revised November10, 2022
Page 16 of 101
2.7 Rule Changes Explained
The rule change process brought about by the passing of Act 173 updated
Vermont’s Special Education regulations to help streamline and strengthen
support and services for students across the state. There are several rule changes
with direct implications for the Evaluation Process.
Those changes are addressed in context throughout the Guide and an overview is provided in
Table 2-1.
Note about Parents: Vermont Special Education rules provide a detailed definition for a
parent for Special Education processes and procedures. According to state regulations, a
parent is:
• A biological or adoptive parent of a student (when attempting to act as the parent
and when more than one party is qualified to act as a parent, the LEA must presume
that individual to be a parent unless the biological or adoptive parent does not have
legal authority to make educational services decisions for the student);
• A foster parent or developmental home provider who has been appointed the
educational surrogate parent by the Vermont Educational Surrogate Parent Program;
• A guardian generally authorized to act as the student’s parent or authorized to make
educational decisions for the student (but not the State if the student is a ward of the
State);
• An individual acting in the place of a biological or adoptive parent with whom the
student lives (e.g., grandparent, stepparent, etc.), or an individual who is legally
responsible for the student’s welfare;
• As educational surrogate parent who has been appointed by the AOE; or
• If a judicial decree or order identifies a specific individual to act as the parent or to
make educational decisions on behalf of a student (the LEA that provides education
or care for a student may not act as the parent).
All references to families and/or parents throughout the Guide are made in accordance with
this definition. For more information, see 20 U.S.C. § 1401(23); 34 C.F.R. § 300.30.
Special Education Evaluation
Implementation Guide (August 3, 2022)
revised November10, 2022
Page 17 of 101
Table 2-1: Overview of Evaluation-Related Rule Changes
Rule Change
Evaluation Components
Impacted
Brief Description of Impact
Definition of Special
Education
Planning for Supports This rule change further specifies the
settings in which Special Education
services can be provided which
expands the possible continuum of
services options that are considered
for the student.
Adverse Effect Pre-Referral Support
Eligibility Determination
Assessment Process
This rule change outlines updated
guidelines for determining if a student
has a disability (except in the case of
SLD or Deaf-Blindness) including
reviewing data in Basic Skill areas and
evidence of prior intervention support.
Definition of Basic
Skills
Assessment Process This rule change added functional
skills to the list of Basic Skill areas to
be assessed when determining if a
student is eligible for Special
Education services.
SLD Classification Pre-Referral Support
Assessment Process
Eligibility Determination
This rule change outlines updated
requirements for determining if a
student has a Specific Learning
Disability using scientific, research-
based interventions or other research-
based models.
Special Education Evaluation
Implementation Guide (August 3, 2022)
revised November10, 2022
Page 18 of 101
2.8 Conclusion
Before diving into each part of the Initial Evaluation Process, it is helpful to look at the process
as a whole - and how the Initial Evaluation Process fits into the broader education landscape in
Vermont. Evaluation is a critical component of ensuring that legal requirements of Child Find
and FAPE are met by each LEA, as well as essential to setting a foundation for a sound,
evidence-based Special Education program that supports eligible students.
Key Questions for LEAs:
As a check for implementation/readiness, LEAs can ask themselves the following questions:
Do we have a process in writing for Child Find that addresses students entering the
LEA, as well as those who are already enrolled and students who are not yet of
school age?
Are all LEA leaders aware of the state regulations, both in terms of their obligations
regarding FAPE and Special Education and in particular the specific rule changes
resulting from the rule making session following the passage of Act 173?
Special Education Evaluation
Implementation Guide (August 3, 2022)
revised November10, 2022
Page 19 of 101
SECTION 3: PROVIDING A SYSTEM OF SUPPORTSFOR ALL STUDENTS
3.1 Introduction
LEAs have a responsibility to ensure that all students are receiving quality instruction and,
when necessary, interventions to help them progress in the general education classroom. The
model most often used to describe this effective educational system is a layered or multi-tiered
system of supports, typically referred to as MTSS. All layered or multi-tiered systems of support
models rely on a fundamental understanding that there is a universal or tier one level of
instruction and intervention that includes all students. In other words, all students are served
within the system of supports.
The VTmtss Field Guide
provides a comprehensive overview of layered, tiered
supports and provides a framework for schools and districts that can be used to
design and improve their systems.
The referral process for special education should be integrated within the overall
educational system. There is a systemic responsibility to ensure that all students
are receiving high quality instruction and intervention that is differentiated to support each
student’s inclusion and growth in general education settings. This instruction and intervention
rely on a comprehensive, well understood assessment system. The many varieties of expertise
that reside in the system are made available to meet student needs in a flexible, responsive, and
highly collaborative process. None of this occurs by chance but is intentionally and
transparently managed systemically, and comprehensively. The extent to which this can be
realized will affect the likelihood that any referral for special education evaluation will be
appropriate, timely, and that all students needing evaluation will be identified.
This Guide focuses on the use of student supports in the context of their role in the special
education evaluation process. Sometimes, students are receiving intervention prior to being
referred for an Initial Evaluation. However, not all students who are receiving intervention will
be referred to Special Education and not all students who are referred to Special Education will
have received comprehensive pre-referral support (e.g., students who are referred by Requests
for Evaluation from parents). Further, it is possible for students who have been through the
Evaluation Process – both those who have been found eligible and those who have not – to
receive additional intervention and supports.
Special Education Evaluation
Implementation Guide (August 3, 2022)
revised November10, 2022
Page 20 of 101
3.2 Using Data to Identify Students in Need of Support
A comprehensive and balanced assessment system is essential for identifying students who
need additional support and to gauge the effectiveness of the supports provided. An effective
assessment system allows informed decision-making and promotes equitable access to the
resources students may need, including special education. There are a variety of assessment
types that are particularly important when considering interventions for individual students.
• Universal screeners
may be used when there are no other assessments in place to
provide standardized information about students’ learning. This is most useful for
academic skills assessment at transition times from one grade band to another, or for
students who are new to a school system. Universal screeners are also used to measure
non-academic skills. Universal screeners are sometimes used at intervals throughout a
school year as a form of progress monitoring.
• Formative assessments are ongoing assessments incorporated into the instruction
process. The primary purpose of these high-frequency measurements is to inform
instruction for a class as a whole and to identify the immediate learning needs of
individual students.
• Benchmark assessments are administered periodically through the school year to
measure student progress toward established goals. The frequency of benchmark
assessment tends to be highest in early grades as basic skills are acquired and less
frequent in upper grades when there is more emphasis on the application and
generalization of skills.
• Diagnostic assessments are used for selected students when there is concern about
learning difficulties. These may involve a more detailed examination of formative or
benchmark assessments, or they may be additional evaluations intended to accurately
probe areas of need. Diagnostic teaching is also a type of diagnostic assessment.
The first use of any of the assessment types listed above would be to inform instruction for
groups of students or individuals. The different assessment types have varying degrees of
sensitivity and accuracy in identifying student needs. In most cases there will be an
accumulated body of evidence- from several types of assessments prior to a referral for an
evaluation for special education.
Special Education Evaluation
Implementation Guide (August 3, 2022)
revised November10, 2022
Page 21 of 101
3.3 Providing Supports
An effective educational system will have well-supported practices to identify student needs
and to provide differentiated approaches that anticipate a variety of learning styles. It will also
have a comprehensive and balanced assessment system that ensures timely and accurate data to
inform instruction as well as measuring individual student progress to ensure that students are
receiving and benefitting from the supports they need.
The Educational Support Team (EST) is a school-based team of experts and educators that meets
regularly to discuss student needs that are not adequately addressed through universally
available supports. The goal of team meetings is to review data and develop specific, time-
bound plans for students who need support through targeted or intensive interventions. The
EST monitors the progress of plans, adjusting them as needed. All Vermont schools maintain an
EST which is intended to ensure that all the expertise and resources available in the general
education system are directed to meet the academic, social-emotional, and behavioral needs of
every student. It is highly recommended that the data collected by the EST about individual
students is shared with the EPT when a referral for a special education evaluation is initiated.
Statute and typical current practice locate the Educational Support Team (EST) at the individual
school level. However, the statute also states that school boards “shall assign responsibility “to
either the superintendent or the principal to develop and maintain the EST. So, the EST itself
operates at the school level but is overseen at the district level.
The AOE has identified several critical responsibilities that the SU/SD assume, as a part of their
support of school-level EST work. These responsibilities can be assumed by a new team, or by
an existing team of district staff and school administrators (District-level EST Oversight
guidance). For the purposes of the oversight guidance, which describes the roles and
responsibilities of the LEA team, the AOE refers to this team as the “District EST Oversight
Team".
In addition to the EST, the following are key components that will support students and are
important for an appropriate referral for evaluation.
Quality Classroom Instruction: Sometimes referred to as Tier I or Universal Supports,
there are many ways to make classroom instruction differentiated and supportive for all
students. Some LEAs use a Universal Design for Learning
approach to making lessons
accessible for learners with differing needs which includes offering multiple means of
representation, engagement, and expression to remove barriers and increase access to
grade-level content (CAST, 2022).
Special Education Evaluation
Implementation Guide (August 3, 2022)
revised November10, 2022
Page 22 of 101
Use of Research-Based Interventions: It’s important for LEAs to implement
interventions that have been studied and proven to work at addressing student
challenges and needs. The What Works Clearinghouse
is frequently cited as a helpful
repository, but there are now many resources that list and rate interventions. Other
resources include
Ed Reports, the Title IV-E Prevention Services Clearinghouse, and the
National Center for Intensive Intervention.
Increased Intensity/Frequency of Interventions: If a student does not make adequate
progress with differentiated classroom supports, a layered, tiered approach offers
interventions that may increase in intensity and/or frequency. For example, an
intervention may start out being offered 30 minutes once per week and if a student does
not make progress, the intervention may be offered more frequently, such as three times
per week.
Progress Monitoring: It is important to keep relevant data to document how a student is
or is not responding to different interventions over time. Progress monitoring is
essential to being able to determine next steps at the end of an intervention cycle (often
4-6 weeks). A team will decide whether to continue the intervention, modify it for
integration in the classroom, offer a higher intensity/frequency intervention, or
discontinue the intervention if goals have been met.
Family Involvement: Schools need to engage families actively and authentically at all
stages of students’ education. Keeping families involved throughout the educational
process is one way to build a collaborative relationship and ensure that all parties are on
the same page about student needs and progress. This includes involvement in EST and
other interventions. The Family Engagement Toolkit and Self-Assessment
offers many
resources and promising practices for working with families.
3.4 Early and Accurate Identification of a Possible Disability
An LEA’s system of supports may initiate an LEA’s Child Find responsibilities, which require
the identification of students with disabilities in need of Special Education. Suspected Disability
occurs when a student exhibits behaviors or learning patterns that are frequently connected to a
particular disability.
One challenge is ensuring that early signals do not lead to over- or misidentification of students
who may not actually need Special Education to address deficits or challenges. In some cases,
Special Education Evaluation
Implementation Guide (August 3, 2022)
revised November10, 2022
Page 23 of 101
students may simply be developing at a slower rate than their peers or potentially need a
different approach to teaching certain content that is unrelated to any disability.
To increase the likelihood of making an accurate referral while recognizing the dangers of over-
identification it is helpful to gain a greater understanding and awareness of signs and
symptoms that may indicate a Suspected Disability. Sample signs and symptoms by age group
can be found in Appendix B
.
3.5 Determining When to Make a Referral
Educators and administrators should use judgement and review a wide array of available data
to make these decisions. When a student exhibits early signs of a Suspected Disability that may
need special education or related services, and/or has not responded to higher-intensity
interventions, educators should review existing evidence to determine if it may be appropriate
to make an Initial Referral for Special Education. When available, supporting data should be
submitted with the Request for Evaluation.
It is important to remember that an Initial Evaluation can also be initiated by a direct Request
for Evaluation submitted by a parent at any time. There is no requirement that a student
receives interventions prior to referral. (see SECTION 4 for more information on Initial Referrals
including timelines and required processes).
Note about Equity: While identification of Suspected Disability is a crucial step to ensuring
schools are providing all students with access to FAPE, it is also important that LEAs
establish clear metrics for Suspected Disability and provide training for staff members to
control for potential biases.
Without that training and reflection, bias about what constitutes “acceptable” and
“unacceptable” performance may lead to differences in how educators identify students to
refer. For example, national data may indicate a greater likelihood that students of color are
more frequently identified as having a disability (National Center for Learning Disabilities,
2020). The balance between having a clear system and leaving room for an individualized
approach is a key component for LEAs.
Special Education Evaluation
Implementation Guide (August 3, 2022)
revised November10, 2022
Page 24 of 101
A student may be referred before, during, and after supports, and an LEA cannot delay or
deny an evaluation based on whether a student has received or is currently receiving
other interventions.
Educators can reflect on the questions below as a guide to determining whether to refer a
student for an Initial Evaluation:
Does the student demonstrate consistent or repeated struggle or underperformance
compared to peers in classroom assessments?
Does the student consistently underperform on Universal Screeners?
Does the student demonstrate consistent or repeated struggle or
underperformance (compared to peers) in district-wide assessments?
Is the student showing little or no progress on (universal) general education
classroom-based interventions?
Is the student showing little or no progress with the consistent implementation of more
intensive interventions or supports?
Does the student have a concerning number of office referrals?
Does the student have behavioral patterns or behavioral needs that could potentially be a
manifestation of a disability?
Does the student have medical reports or data that could suggest a disability?
Do observations inside or outside of the classroom suggest needs for Special Education
services?
Is there a clear, Suspected Disability and corresponding signs and symptoms?
3.6 Conclusion
The most effective method of meeting student needs is a highly effective school system. All
students are general education students, and all staff shares responsibility for all students.
There is a systemic responsibility to create and sustain structures that enhance collaboration,
develop, and share expertise, and support data systems that are responsive and accessible. In
summary:
• A comprehensive and balanced assessment system is necessary to identify student
supports in any eventual referral for Special Education.
• The Educational Support Team (EST) provides a structured process to use data to
identify student concerns and develop a plan to address those concerns. The data from
an EST can be invaluable if a student is referred for Special Education.
Special Education Evaluation
Implementation Guide (August 3, 2022)
revised November10, 2022
Page 25 of 101
• The earlier a student with a possible disability is identified for further supports, the
more effective those supports will be. It is vital to use data and have clear processes in
place to avoid over-identification for Special Education.
• Beginning with high-quality universal instruction, all students should access
differentiated supports and interventions as needed. Families must be engaged as equal
partners in a student’s education.
• Families may request a referral for Special Education at any time, which must be
addressed immediately by the LEA. When staff suspect a disability, there should be a
clear process in place at the LEA to move forward collaboratively.
Key Questions for LEAs:
As a check for implementation/readiness, LEAs can ask themselves the following questions:
Have we established clear benchmarks to support identification of any students in
need of additional support (e.g., Universal Screener data, behavioral data, etc.)?
Are our staff members well-versed in the early signs of suspected disabilities and
clear on next steps for recommending a student for additional support?
Do we have our processes and procedures for tiered support, including progression
to referral for Special Education services (when applicable) clearly documented?
Does our staff understand the process for submitting an Initial Referral and how it
differs from students in need of additional support via our System of supports?
Do we have a process for authentically engaging our families in our System of
supports?
Special Education Evaluation
Implementation Guide (August 3, 2022)
revised November10, 2022
Page 26 of 101
SECTION 4: THE INITIAL REFERRAL
4.1 Introduction to Initial Referral
Initial Referral is the first step in a Special Education evaluation
process for a student who was not previously receiving Special
Education services. This step is taken for students who either
previously had an IEP and services were discontinued, students
changing LEAs, or students who are being referred for Special
Education evaluation for the first time.
The steps of Initial Referral are:
1. Request for Evaluation: The individual (e.g., parent, staff member, community partner)
seeking the evaluation on behalf of the student can submit a request verbally or in
writing.
2. Determining Next Steps: Once an LEA receives a Request for Evaluation for Special
Education, they will decide to move forward with the Evaluation Process with the
existing information, convene an Evaluation Planning Team (EPT) to discuss the request,
or deny the Request for Evaluation in writing.
4.2 Request for Evaluation
The Initial Evaluation Process begins when a verbal or written Request for Evaluation for
Special Education is made. The Request for Evaluation can be made by a parent, as well as
school administrators, teachers, LEA, or other key community partners (e.g., agency staff,
external providers) on behalf of a student who is suspected of having a disability requiring
Special Education services. The process and guidelines outlined below are broadly applicable to
all Requests for Evaluation, irrespective of who makes it. Any variance in process for different
requestors should be defined by the LEA.
6
6
While the law and regulations do not mandate different steps for Requests for Evaluation made by a
student’s parent, many LEAs have policies or processes that immediately move those Requests for
Evaluation straight to the EPT or Assessment Process.
Special Education Evaluation
Implementation Guide (August 3, 2022)
revised November10, 2022
Page 27 of 101
A Request can be made verbally or in writing. However, it’s important for the individual
receiving the request to understand that all inquiries about student needs do not constitute a
request to begin the special education evaluation process.
Procedures established by the LEA should identify the person responsible for receiving all
requests for initial referral and deciding on next steps for the request. All staff should be
informed about what to do with any Request they receive for special education evaluation
including where to log the request and next steps for informing the responsible party that a
request has been made. The designated individual responsible for deciding next steps should
establish a process for responding to any preliminary inquiries within the 15 day timeline
described below. Responses should provide further explanation of the purpose and procedures
of an evaluation and any more appropriate alternatives to the concerns being raised. All
responses to requests or inquiries should be documented. Regardless of the outcome of the
discussion, any parent making any inquiry about an initial referral should receive a copy of
parental rights in special education, also referred to as Procedural Safeguards.
4.3 Determining Next Steps
Within 15 school days of receipt of the Request for Evaluation, the LEA must either:
1. Request that the parent consent to initiate the evaluation.
2. Convene an EPT meeting; or
3. Provide written reasons for denial of this request.
An EPT is a group of individuals, including the parent, that is responsible for developing an
evaluation plan and reviewing the results to determine if a student is or continues to be eligible
for Special Education and related services. The following members of the EPT must be present,
and some individuals on the EPT may serve multiple roles:
A Note about Requests for Evaluation: Because Requests for Evaluation can be made
verbally or in writing, it is important for LEAs to have policies in place regarding how to
follow up on all inquiries. It is possible that a general inquiry from a parent, upon further
discussion, may not actually constitute a Request for Evaluation. These inquiries still need to
be responded to, but an immediate evaluation may not be required. In all cases, discussions
about the possible provision of Special Education services should be taken seriously,
documented, and forwarded to the appropriate person to follow up appropriately.
Special Education Evaluation
Implementation Guide (August 3, 2022)
revised November10, 2022
Page 28 of 101
An LEA representative who is qualified to provide or supervise Special Education
services, knowledgeable about general education, and knowledgeable about available
LEA resources.
At least one special educator of the child and if appropriate, one Special Education
service provider for the child.
At least one general education teacher of the child (if the child may participate in the
general education environment).
An individual who can interpret the instructional implication of evaluation results.
The parent(s).
The child, if appropriate.
Other individuals who have knowledge or expertise regarding the child, at the
discretion of the parent and LEA.
For a child who may be suspected of having a Specific Learning Disability, the EPT must also
include:
The child’s general education teacher or a general education teacher qualified to teach a
child of that age.
At least one person qualified to conduct individual diagnostic examinations of children
(e.g., school psychologist, speech, and language pathologist).
According to state regulations, one member of the EPT can serve in multiple
roles. For example, if the Special Education teacher is knowledgeable about
general education and available LEA resources, it is possible that this individual
can also play the role of the LEA representative during the meeting.
Note about this Decision: It is important for LEAs to have clear processes for determining
how to proceed. For example, many LEAs default to holding an EPT meeting in all cases
unless extraordinary circumstances exist that make it clear that either (A) no evaluation is
necessary or (B) the Suspected Disability and all relevant assessments are unequivocally
agreed upon by all prospective members of the EPT such that an actual meeting is not
necessary. LEAs should use the EPT meeting as an opportunity to convene all relevant adults
to make a thorough plan for the student, and therefore should not be quick to skip this step.
Special Education Evaluation
Implementation Guide (August 3, 2022)
revised November10, 2022
Page 29 of 101
4.3.1 Convening the EPT
If the LEA proceeds with initiating the evaluation, the following should be sent to parents
within 15 school days of receiving the Request for Evaluation with sufficient notice to schedule
and hold the meeting:
Notice of Meeting (Form 1);
Special Education Evaluation Plan and Report (Form 2);
Notice of Local Educational Agency Decision (Form 7)); and
Notice of Procedural Safeguards.
4.3.2 Requesting Consent
Following the EPT meeting to plan for the evaluation, the following should be sent to parents:
Special Education Evaluation Plan and Report (Form 2);
Prior Written Notice for Special Education Evaluation (Form 3);
Consent for A Special Education Evaluation (Form 3a);
Notice of Local Educational Agency Decision (Form 7)); and
Notice of Procedural Safeguards.
4.3.3 Denying the Request for Evaluation
If an LEA denies a Request for Evaluation for Special Education, it is recommended that they
use the Notice of Local Educational Agency Decision (Form 7
) to inform the parent, in writing,
of the denial and the rationale for such a decision. It is a promising practice to have an EPT
make that determination, but it could also be made by the LEA’s Special Education
administrator.
Special Education Evaluation
Implementation Guide (August 3, 2022)
revised November10, 2022
Page 30 of 101
4.4 Consent, Timelines, and Documentation
4.4.1 Parental Consent
According to state regulations, Parental Consent means that the parent understands and agrees
in writing to the carrying out of the activity for which consent is sought. This can only be done
after the parent has been fully informed of all information relevant to the activity (via an
Evaluation Plan, Procedural Safeguards, Prior Written Notice), in the parent’s preferred
language, or the LEA can provide a trained translator to help the parent understand their rights.
The parent must also understand that consent is voluntary and may be revoked at any time –
and that if the parent does revoke consent, that revocation does not negate any action that took
place between the time when consent was initially given and when it was revoked (e.g.,
revocation is not retroactive).
Consent must be obtained before individual tests can be administered except in the case of
classroom, LEA, or statewide assessments. Parental Consent during an Initial Evaluation is
discussed in more detail in later sections of the Guide, but it is important to establish a clear
understanding of it from the outset of the Initial Evaluation Process. As an essential part of the
EPT, parents should be informed and understand the procedures throughout.
Note about Procedural Safeguards and Parental Rights: The purpose of the Procedural
Safeguards notice is to inform parents about their rights under IDEA. This document sets
forth a complete representation of their rights as parents and the protections they (and their
child) have under the law. Topics covered include, but are not limited to:
• Parental consent
• Access to student records
• Due process and/or State complaints
• Discipline processes
LEAs and schools must send the Procedural Safeguards notice to parents at least once each
school year and at other important milestones, such as when an Initial Evaluation is being
planned. Further, the notice must be sent in the parent’s preferred language, or the LEA can
provide a trained translator to help the parent understand their rights.
Special Education Evaluation
Implementation Guide (August 3, 2022)
revised November10, 2022
Page 31 of 101
4.4.2 Timelines
While it is discussed above, it is worth noting again that the timeline for responding to a
Request for Evaluation is 15 school days. The Evaluation Process (including sending all reports
and documentation to the parents) must be completed within 60 calendar days of obtaining
Parental Consent for assessments. There are some exceptions to this timeline which will be
discussed in later sections. Figure 4-1 provides an example of this timeline if an EPT meeting is
held.
Figure 4-1: Sample Initial Referral and Evaluation Timeline
If the LEA decides to move forward and an EPT meeting is not held, the process may look
slightly different. Figure 4-2 shows the alternative steps (Note that the timeline is the same, but
the process varies).
Figure 4-2: Alternative Initial Referral and Evaluation Timeline
4.4.3 Documentation
The timelines described above are important, and therefore, it is critical that LEAs have clear
procedures for documenting each step in the Initial Evaluation Process, especially when a
Request for Evaluation is made to ensure compliance is met. Request received dates should be
tracked and appropriate next steps should be taken in a timely manner to prevent the timeline
from continuing without action.
Special Education Evaluation
Implementation Guide (August 3, 2022)
revised November10, 2022
Page 32 of 101
It is also helpful for LEAs to have training or guidance for all staff and families
describing what constitutes an appropriate Request for Evaluation. The more
robust the Request for Evaluation is, the easier it will be to determine next steps.
That’s not to say that a well-documented Request for Evaluation will obviate a
need for an EPT meeting, but the EPT will be more informed and well-positioned to move
ahead with the appropriate assessments, etc. with solid evidence supporting those decisions.
On the other hand, the LEA must proceed with next steps, even if a Request for Evaluation
comes in with no or very little documentation.
4.5 Conclusion
Initial Referral represents the first step in the Initial Evaluation Process and has two component
parts: Request for Evaluation and Determining Next Steps. Requests for Evaluation can be made
from a variety of sources and can be made verbally or in writing. Following the determination
that a Request for Evaluation has been made, the LEA will either proceed by requesting consent
for evaluation from parents, convening an EPT, or denying the Request in writing. There is
some discretion in how LEAs set up policies and procedures regarding managing Initial
Referral processes, but it is important to ensure that timelines and parent rights are always met.
Key Questions for LEAs:
As a check for implementation/readiness, LEAs can ask themselves the following questions:
Do we have a process for ensuring referrals for an initial Special Education
evaluation can be made by a variety of sources including school staff,
administrators, parents, members of the EPT and other relevant organizations?
Have we developed resources to help community partners understand how to
submit a high-quality referral (e.g., who to make the request to, what information
might be helpful to include)? Have we trained all relevant staff members on the EPT
procedures, including how to decide if Initial Evaluation is necessary?
Do we have processes to ensure the right documentation is sent to parents within 15
school days of receiving a referral?
Special Education Evaluation
Implementation Guide (August 3, 2022)
revised November10, 2022
Page 33 of 101
SECTION 5: THE ASSESSMENT PROCESS
5.1 Introduction to Assessment Process
The Assessment Process refers to the stage of a Special Education
Evaluation Process when the EPT plans for and gathers evidence to
inform decisions about a student’s eligibility and potential next steps.
A variety of methods are used to gather assessment information,
including observations of the student, interviews with the family,
informal tests, and standardized, formal tests. Assessment information
not only helps identify a child as eligible for Special Education
services, but it also allows educators to more strategically develop educational programs that
are most suitable for the needs of the individual student.
According to Gearheart and Gearheart, assessment is “a process that involves the
systematic collection and interpretation of a wide variety of information on which
to base instructional/intervention decisions and, when appropriate, classification
and placement decisions. Assessment is primarily a problem-solving process.”
(Gearheart, 1990)
The data collected during the Assessment Process serves three main purposes in the Initial
Evaluation Process:
1. Disability Determination: Assessment data (including analysis by trained assessment
administrators) provides the EPT with information to clarify the specific nature of the
student's needs and determine whether a student has a disability (See Section 6 for more
information about determining disability).
2. Eligibility Determination: If a disability is determined, assessment data is also used to
determine whether that disability is causing in an Adverse Effect on the student’s
educational performance
7
and if the student requires Special Education services to make
progress in school (See Section 6 for more information about eligibility).
7
Due to the recent rule changes, the criteria for determining SLD and Deaf-Blindness have changed
slightly to no longer explicitly include a separate Adverse Effect consideration. Instead, the determination
of these disability categories inherently include evidence that the student’s educational performance has
been impacted.
Special Education Evaluation
Implementation Guide (August 3, 2022)
revised November10, 2022
Page 34 of 101
3. Instructional Planning: Finally, data collected during the Assessment Process is also
used to develop a program for appropriate instruction and support to meet the child's
needs (See Section 7 for more information about planning for services).
5.2 Evaluation Planning Team
The Assessment Process typically begins at the first EPT meeting, convened during an Initial
Referral. As described in Section 4.3
, the EPT is the body responsible for the arranging and
conducting evaluations. It is comprised of key members of the school community, including the
parent and student, when appropriate.
While many members of the EPT may have worked together for some time, it is always
important to use quality meeting norms to orient each member to both the goals for the meeting
and the goals for the whole Evaluation Process. Effective EPT meetings have some or all of the
following components:
Introductions of all members and their role on the team.
Recap of what has come before/ led up to the meeting.
Clear goals stated at the beginning of the meeting.
Opportunities for all members to be heard, especially the parent and student.
Shared understanding of terms, including avoiding the use of jargon and defining
acronyms.
Use of respectful, strengths-based language, tone, and attention.
Assigning a notetaker to record meeting highlights and summarizing takeaways at the
conclusion of the meeting.
The Vermont Family Engagement Toolkit and Self-Assessment
has a number of resources
including a Family Engagement for IEP Team Members document. While the latter resource is
designated for IEP meetings, it contains many strategies to support effective meetings with
families and a comprehensive approach to family engagement more generally.
5.3 Assessment Planning
Assessment Planning, the first stage of the Assessment Process, is when the EPT determines
what assessments are necessary to better understand the student being referred for an
evaluation. The EPT may decide to use the Special Education Evaluation Plan and Report (Form
2) as they complete this stage. Figure 5-1 breaks down Assessment Planning into steps and each
step is explained in the sections that follow.
Special Education Evaluation
Implementation Guide (August 3, 2022)
revised November10, 2022
Page 35 of 101
Figure 5-1: Components of Assessment Planning
5.3.1 Clarify the Suspected Disability
Clarifying the Suspected Disability is the first step of Assessment Planning. During this
conversation, the EPT should consider all available, relevant data (including information from
the Request for Evaluation) about the student.
Some examples of relevant data include:
Universal Screener results
Progress monitoring data collected from prior interventions
Student work samples
Student observations
Informal interviews with parents
Developmental history
Medical notes and reports
Informal criterion-referenced tests
Informal checklists or rating scales
Table 6-1 in Section 6.3 provides a checklist for determining whether a student has a disability
that the EPT can also use to determine the Suspected Disability category – which is the same
information used during the Eligibility Determination. A printable version can also be found in
Appendix C.
Special Education Evaluation
Implementation Guide (August 3, 2022)
revised November10, 2022
Page 36 of 101
5.3.2 Identify Areas to Assess
Once the EPT has clarified the student’s Suspected Disability category, the Team should discuss
what assessments must be conducted. A variety of assessments should be planned to gather the
most relevant information about the student and ensure that no single measure will be the sole
criterion of disability or need.
Assessments should focus on three areas of student functioning, as seen in Figure 5-2. The EPT
must ultimately assess all student characteristics and other factors that may have a significant
influence on eligibility, services to be offered, and accommodations to be made.
Basic Skills: State regulations define Basic Skills
as the skills necessary for academic performance
including a focus on communication, intellectual,
or cognitive capacities and learning styles as seen
in the list below:
A. Oral expression
B. Listening comprehension
C. Written expression
D. Basic reading skills
E. Reading comprehension
F. Mathematics calculation
G. Mathematics reasoning
H. Motor skills
I. Functional Skills
The new regulations add Functional Skills to the list of Basic Skills. Functional
Performance is the acquisition of essential and critical skills needed for children
with disabilities to learn specific daily living, personal, social, and employment
skills, or the skills needed to increase performance and independence at work, in
school, in the home, in the community, for leisure time, and for postsecondary and
other life-long learning opportunities. For more information about Functional Skills, see the
Guidance to the Rule Change Functional Skills/Functional Performance
.
Developmental Areas of Concern: Developmental Areas include other, broader areas of
development that should be considered for assessment including:
Figure 5-2: Three Areas of Student Functioning
Special Education Evaluation
Implementation Guide (August 3, 2022)
revised November10, 2022
Page 37 of 101
1. Physical characteristics
● Vision
● Hearing
● Health
● Medical
● Nutrition
2. Social, behavioral, or emotional
characteristics
● Self-esteem
● Self-control
● Interaction with peers and adults
3. Adaptive behavior across settings
● Independence skills
● Coping skills
● Self-care skills
4. Relevant life circumstances
● Family
● Community
● Environmental factors
5. Speech characteristics
● Articulation
● Fluency
● Voice
6. Language and communication skills
7. Intellectual or cognitive characteristics
● Learning abilities
● Learning styles
● Reasoning
8. Vocational needs
9. Skills in the learning environment
10. Assistive technology needs related to
devices and service.
Educational Performance: Educational Performance is a combination of the academic and
functional behavioral skills necessary for a student to successfully perform within the general
education classroom at a level equivalent to their grade-level peers. Indicators of Educational
Performance can include present and past grades, report cards and reports of progress (social-
emotional and/or academic), achievement test scores and measures of ongoing classroom
performance such as curriculum-based assessment (formative and summative assessments),
work samples, and data relative to responses to interventions.
After careful consideration of existing documentation and data, and a determination of the
Suspected Disability, the EPT must:
Determine how it will assess the student’s current level of performance in all curriculum
areas where Special Education may be required;
Consider assessment in all Basic Skills and Developmental Areas of concern aligned to
that Suspected Disability; and
Special Education Evaluation
Implementation Guide (August 3, 2022)
revised November10, 2022
Page 38 of 101
Determine if additional assessment in other areas is necessary to gather information that
may influence eligibility, services, and accommodations.
A fifth-grade student has been referred to the EPT as part of the Initial
Evaluation Process. The student’s doctor recently diagnosed him with Attention
Hyperactivity Deficit Disorder (ADHD) and the parent believes this is impacting
the student’s school experience, specifically his ability to form relationships with
peers and make progress in his classes. At the Assessment Planning meeting, the
EPT reviews the information the parent submitted with their Request for Evaluation (parent
narrative and the Doctor’s medical report) along with input from the student’s teachers, student
work samples, grades, and progress reports from this year. The parent’s narrative describes the
student’s continued challenges with independently completing tasks at home such as requiring
multiple reminders to finish getting dressed, brushing his teeth, completing his homework, and
packing his backpack. At the meeting, the parent further explains that she is seeing increasingly
more reactive behavior from her son including verbal outbursts when he’s frustrated and
physical fights with his siblings. Input from teachers corroborates these areas of challenge with
teachers noting the student often doesn’t complete tasks but describing the behavior as work
avoidant and occasionally disruptive. The teacher notes that the student will often get into
verbal altercations with classmates when asked to complete tasks.
The EPT determines that, based on this information, the Suspected Disability category is Other
Health Impairment with an ADHD diagnosis. Based on the student’s Educational Performance
they decide to assess the student’s Basic Skills in reading, reading comprehension, and written
expression. Additionally, upon reflection about the parent’s concerns and input from teachers,
the EPT decides to assess the student’s Functional Skills in the areas of social-emotional and
communication. While the student does have a diagnosis of ADHD, the Team aims to gather as
much information as possible to ensure they have a clear understanding of the student’s current
performance and potential program needs.
Nationwide, there is an overrepresentation of linguistically diverse students in Special
Education, frequently due to a lack of knowledge by school teams about how to differentiate
between language acquisition needs for a student who has limited English proficiency and a
student who has language acquisition needs because of a language-based disability (Mid-
Atlantic Equity Consortium, Inc., 2016). Thus, it is important to understand this distinction and
select assessments, including the method of administration, accordingly.
Special Education Evaluation
Implementation Guide (August 3, 2022)
revised November10, 2022
Page 39 of 101
EPTs may want to take the following steps to ensure selection of appropriate
assessments and method of administration:
Consider the student’s dominant language when selecting assessment
materials (Assess students who are non-English dominant in their native
language, and assess English dominant students in English, and if appropriate, in native
language).
Use assessments that minimize cultural bias.
Communicate any departures from standard testing procedures and the possible effects
on the interpretation of results.
Ascertain whether errors are typical of other students with similar backgrounds or level
of English proficiency (typical errors may be indication that the student’s learning
difficulties are primarily due to cultural factors or English language acquisition rather
than a disability).
Review test results with family members or other persons from student’s background to
gain additional insight as to the student’s performance (provide an interpreter, as
appropriate, to ensure understanding and engage family members).
(Colorado Department of Education, 2017).
The areas for assessment are highly individualized decisions and it is important that all relevant
evidence is reviewed in order to make the best possible plan for the student.
Although the new regulation no longer requires the documentation of three
measures of Adverse Effect for a Basic Skill area, LEAs are still required to
document Adverse Effect in one area. Promising practice demonstrates that
additional factors, while not required to be documented should continue to be
used to substantiate an Adverse Effect. This approach will impact an EPT’s Assessment
Planning.
An EPT should still consider how it will use evidence such as grades, performance on
individual and group assessments, continuous progress monitoring, attendance, observations,
clinical judgment from qualified experts, and samples of student work throughout the
Assessment Process. For more information about the rule changes related to Adverse Effect, see
Section 6.4 and the Resource Table in the Appendix.
Special Education Evaluation
Implementation Guide (August 3, 2022)
revised November10, 2022
Page 40 of 101
5.3.3 Decide Who Will Assess and What Batteries Will be Used
The final part of Assessment Planning focuses on using the information about which areas need
to be assessed to identify what assessments will be administered and who will be responsible
for conducting them and analyzing the results.
Decisions about what batteries of assessments to use should be systematic, strategic, and
discussion should be tailored to individual student needs. EPTs should consider using a
planning tool that supports decision making specifically related to the Basic Skills and
Developmental Areas of Concern.
Teams should document their decisions in writing, for example using the Special Education
Evaluation Plan and Report Form (Form 2) which was introduced at the beginning of
Section
5.3. Beyond what is asked in the Evaluation Plan, the EPT may also want to discuss timelines,
settings, accommodations, or other considerations that might be relevant during the
Assessment Process.
Note on Assessment Administration: While there may be EPT members who are trained in
administering a given assessment, it is important that the EPT consider who on the Team is
able to analyze the results of each assessment so that they can be reviewed by the Team
during the eligibility discussion. Additionally, when selecting assessments, there are
considerations the EPT should make to ensure assessments are administered in an effective
way. See Table 5-1 for a checklist of considerations.
5.3.4 Assessment Planning for Students Suspected of Having SLD
While the Assessment Process likely will not vary significantly for students suspected of having
a Specific Learning Disability (SLD), there are some specific considerations to be made about
which assessments to conduct and who must assess. For example, at least one member of the
EPT, other than the student’s current teacher, who is trained in observation, shall observe the
student and the learning environment, including the general education setting to document
academic performance and behavior in areas of difficulty.
Additionally, the rule changes require LEAs to use either a model based on whether a student
responds to scientific, research-based intervention or one based on other alternative research-
based procedures to determine if a student has a Specific Learning Disability.
Special Education Evaluation
Implementation Guide (August 3, 2022)
revised November10, 2022
Page 41 of 101
While not an exclusive list, there are two common methods for collecting data in
a SLD Evaluation Process:
• Patterns of Strengths and Weaknesses (PSW); and
• Response to Intervention (RTI).
The PSW Assessment Process answers the question of “why” a student is not responding to
intervention. It assists teams in ruling out additional causes of low achievement. If using this
method, the general process is as follows:
1. General classroom instruction and targeted interventions are delivered to the student
and progress monitoring data is collected – student does not make progress.
2. At the EPT Assessment Planning meeting, after reviewing existing data, a hypothesis is
made as to the psychological strengths and weaknesses of the student and an Evaluation
Plan is created to test that theory.
3. The EPT determines which assessments to use to test that hypothesis. Example of
assessments to conduct may include:
o Cross-Battery Assessment (“XBA”)
o Milton Dehn’s Processing Model
o Discrepancy/Consistency Method (DCM)
o Concordance-Discordance
o Core-Selective Evaluation Process (C-SEP).
4. The EPT uses assessment results, classroom observation, grades, and work samples to
determine the validity of its hypothesis, using factors such as:
o Academic achievement deficits
o Processing strengths to ensure otherwise normal learning profile
o Processing weakness.
(Chino Valley Unified School District, 2019)
RTI is a multi-tiered approach to identifying and providing support for students with learning
and behavior needs. It is a proactive approach that involves closely monitoring student
progress to measures students’ skills and uses this data to decide which interventions to use
When using RTI, or other tiered systems of support, the LEA should account for data collection
at all tiers through progress monitoring systems and, when planning for assessments, data
collected as part of this system would be considered (Learning Disabilities Association of
America, n.d.). See Section 3
for more information on System of supports.
Special Education Evaluation
Implementation Guide (August 3, 2022)
revised November10, 2022
Page 42 of 101
A student is referred to the EPT for a suspected SLD. The student has already
received several interventions through the EST, but there is no clear progress data
for the student. The LEA has decided to implement the PSW approach for
determining SLD. Given this, the EPT determines that the School Psychologist
should administer the Cross Battery Assessment. The team also decides to review
the student’s classroom grades and State assessment data. The EPT identifies a Special
Education teacher to conduct a classroom observation of the student and collect additional data
on response to interventions and overall performance in class. The student’s parent noted a
concern with a change in their affect and personality at home, with further confirmation
provided by the student’s classroom teacher. As a result, the Team decided to also have the
student’s social-emotional behaviors assessed by the School Psychologist and the Special
Education teacher.
5.4 Conducting and Reviewing Assessments
Once a clear plan for assessment has been completed by the EPT, the LEA must obtain Parental
Consent to begin acting on that plan. If they have not yet been sent to the parent(s), the Team
should send the following:
Prior Written Notice for Special Education Evaluation (Form 3);
Consent for a Special Education Evaluation (Form 3a);
Special Education Evaluation Plan and Report (Form 2);
Notice of Local Educational Agency Decision (Form 7)); and
Notice of Procedural Safeguards.
The considerations in the checklist below 1 should be used to ensure that assessments are
quality and planned for administration in an effective way.
Assessment Consideration Checklist
Ensure that assessment instruments used are…
Selected and administered so as not to be discriminatory on a racial or cultural basis.
Provided and administered in the child’s native language or other mode of
communication.
Special Education Evaluation
Implementation Guide (August 3, 2022)
revised November10, 2022
Page 43 of 101
Provided and administered in the form most likely to yield accurate information on
what the child knows and can do academically, developmentally, and functionally,
unless it is clearly not feasible to provide or administer.
Used for the purposes for which the assessments or measures are valid and reliable.
Administered by trained and knowledgeable personnel.
Administered in accordance with any instructions provided by the producer of the
assessments.
Tailored to assess specific areas of educational need and not merely designed to provide
a single general intelligence quotient.
Selected and administered so as best to ensure that if an assessment is administered to a
child with impaired sensory, manual, or speaking skills, the assessment results
accurately reflect the child’s aptitude or achievement level or whatever other factors the
test purports to measure (rather than reflecting the impaired skills, unless that is what
the test is designed for).
The bottom line when conducting assessments is that each assessment or the series of
assessments together should be sufficiently comprehensive to identify the child’s Special
Education and related service needs, whether commonly linked to the Suspected Disability
category. The tools and strategies used will provide relevant information that, if the child is
found eligible, will be used by the IEP Team in determining the necessary programs and
services to meet the child’s educational needs.
Note about Students Transferring Between LEAs: If a student who is in the Assessment
Process transfers from one LEA to another in the same academic year, it is important for both
LEAs to coordinate as necessary and as expeditiously as possible, to ensure prompt
completion of full evaluations. See Section 5.5 for more information about the timeline for
completion in these cases.
Special Education Evaluation
Implementation Guide (August 3, 2022)
revised November10, 2022
Page 44 of 101
Following the completion of each assessment, a report should be drafted by the individual who
administered it.
8
This report may include information such as:
● Whether the student requires specialized education and related services to access and
progress in general education core curriculum.
● The relevant behavior noted during the observation of the student in an appropriate
setting(s) and the relationship of that behavior to the pupil’s academic and social
functioning.
● The educationally relevant health, development, and medical findings, if any.
● Whether there is such a discrepancy between achievement and ability that cannot be
corrected without Special Education and related services for students with learning
disabilities.
● A determination concerning the effects of environmental, cultural, or economic
disadvantage, where appropriate.
● The need for specialized services, materials, and equipment for students with low
incidence disabilities.
(Sweetwater Union High School District, n.d.)
It is also promising practice for the assessor to include a statement in the assessment report
indicating whether they believe the test results are valid for the specific student being tested. If
they believe that the test results are not valid, the following should be noted:
1. A statement explaining why and a description, if any, to which the assessment varied
from standard conditions.
2. Methods, procedures, and tests used to assess the student.
3. Instructional implications of assessment results.
4. Language in which the testing was completed and test results.
5. Consideration of any independent assessments that parent requested to be part of the
assessment process.
6. The basis for making determination of eligibility recommendation.
8
There is a distinction to be made here between each assessment report and the final EPT report that
comes at the end of the Evaluation Process. While each assessor should write their own assessment report
to provide to the parent and the EPT, the final EPT report will reflect only the portions of the assessment
reports that the Team felt were vital in their Eligibility Determination.
Special Education Evaluation
Implementation Guide (August 3, 2022)
revised November10, 2022
Page 45 of 101
5.5 Timelines, Consent, and Documentation
As illustrated in Figures 4.1 and 4.2, once parents have signed and returned the Consent for
evaluation, the Assessment Process begins. It is important that the EPT documents and records
when Parental Consent was received, as this begins the 60-calendar day evaluation timeline.
(See
Section 4 for more information about what constitutes Parental Consent). To increase the
likelihood of obtaining Parental Consent, LEAs may want to ensure that the processes and
expectations more generally for parent engagement are clear to all staff. Further, the purpose of
the Notice of Local Education Agency Decision (
Form 7) and Procedural Safeguards is to make
sure parents understand the actions proposed by the LEA. In many cases, LEAs may want to
follow up with parents in person or over the phone to walk parents through their contents and
answer any questions they may have.
Evaluations cannot proceed without the parent signing off. Remember, there are at least two
main touchpoints for Consent during the Initial Evaluation Process: Prior to conducting new
assessments and prior to providing Special Education and related services. In both instances,
the LEA should use reasonable efforts to obtain Parental Consent and documentation of these
efforts should be made at all steps, including:
Detailed records of telephone calls made or attempted and the results of those calls.
Copies of correspondence sent to parents and any responses received.
Detailed records of visits made to the parent’s home or place of employment and the
results of those visits.
For more information on Parental Consent see the Vermont Notice of Procedural Safeguards
.
Note about the Failure to Obtain Consent: If the parent refuses to consent to the entire
evaluation, the LEA may seek consent through mediation, due process, or by reviewing
existing data. (The Guide does not cover due process or mediation. For more information
about those processes, see the Vermont Agency of Education website
or connect with the
AOE’s technical assistance line at aoe.s[email protected] or (802) 828-1256).
Alternatively, the LEA may also decide not to pursue the evaluation and will document
the justification for doing so in the student’s record. There will be no Child Find violation
if the LEA decides not to move forward in the absence of Parental Consent if all other
conditions have been met.
If the parent refuses to consent to one part of the Evaluation Plan, the LEA must still
proceed with the other assessments.
Special Education Evaluation
Implementation Guide (August 3, 2022)
revised November10, 2022
Page 46 of 101
If the evaluation will exceed 60 calendar days, the LEA must inform the parent(s) in writing
prior to the end of the timeline for completion that the evaluation will not be completed within
the designated timeframe. Notice of Initial Evaluation Delay (Form 4
) provides a template for
this communication. The LEA must explain the reason (an exceptional circumstance) for the
delay, list the schedule for pending evaluations, and identify the expected date for completion
of the Evaluation Plan and Report. Permissible reasons for delay are almost exclusively child or
family-centered reasons.
If the Evaluation Plan and Report is delayed for some factor other than the ones described
above, it is recommended that a formal meeting of the EPT be held anyway, and a
determination be made on whatever existing information is available within the timeframe. If
the EPT is unable to come to a decision because of the lack of information, the reasons for delay
and timelines for completion should be documented. Notice of Initial Evaluation Delay (Form 4
)
is also a template for this communication. In these cases, the LEA will be out of compliance with
statutory timeline regulations.
The 60-day timeline will not apply to an LEA if:
The parent repeatedly fails or refuses to make a student available for the evaluation;
A student moves to a new LEA before the eligibility evaluation in the old LEA has been
completed; and
o The new LEA is making sufficient progress to ensure a prompt completion of the
evaluation; and
o The parent and new LEA have agreed to the specific time when the evaluations
will be completed.
5.6 Conclusion
The Assessment Process can sometimes be an area of the Evaluation Process where Teams
spend most of their time and resources – getting the right plan in place to ensure evidence is
collected in all necessary areas, by qualified professionals, within the designated timelines
involves many moving parts. However, it is important to note that this is also a critical moment
to get all adults on the same page about the best way to move forward to better meet the needs
for a student who needs additional or different support, whether they are ultimately found
eligible for Special Education.
Special Education Evaluation
Implementation Guide (August 3, 2022)
revised November10, 2022
Page 47 of 101
SECTION 6: ELIGIBILITY DETERMINATION
6.1 Introduction to Eligibility Determination
Once an EPT has collected all relevant information through the
Assessment Process, sufficient evidence should exist for the Team
to be able to determine whether a student meets the criteria for
Special Education. This is called Eligibility Determination.
There are three main criteria addressed as part of Eligibility
Determination. While this was formerly referred to as the “3 Gates
Framework,” the Guide will use the term Eligibility Criteria when
discussing these considerations.
Key Questions for LEAs:
As a check for implementation/readiness, LEAs can ask themselves the following questions:
Has the LEA set forth policies and procedures for identifying and assembling an
appropriate EPT when a new Initial Referral is made?
Does the LEA have access to a well-rounded set of assessment and tools for
gathering and interpreting evidence about a student’s area of Suspected Disability
(including trained EPT members who can administer assessments/interpret
results)?
Do members of an EPT have access to systems for maintaining relevant
documentation about students (e.g., progress monitoring data systems, student
information systems, etc.) and/or ways of obtaining that information if not through
direct access?
Do all members of an EPT understand what is required to be completed during the
Assessment process, including how to obtain and document informed parental
Consent?
Special Education Evaluation
Implementation Guide (August 3, 2022)
revised November10, 2022
Page 48 of 101
Generally, a school-aged child is eligible for Special Education if:
• The student has a disability according to the established criteria in the IDEA; and
• The student’s disability results in an Adverse Effect on the student’s educational
performance;
9
and
• The student needs Special Education to make progress in school.
The Special Education rule changes have updated the Eligibility Criteria for students with a
Specific Learning Disability and Deaf-Blindness. This rule change is explained in greater detail
in Section 5.3.4
and an overview of eligibility for SLD is outlined below.
There are different elements that must be determined depending on which disability category is
being considered. They are depicted in the Figures below.
9
The criterion related to showing Adverse Effect does not apply for SLD or Deaf-Blindness. See Section
6.3 for more information.
Note about Language: The AOE is moving away from the use of the term “gates” in Eligibility
Determination after receiving feedback from educators that the term may create the
impression that there are obstacles that must be passed through to obtain Special Education
services. While not the intention behind this term, the AOE recognizes that language is
important. By moving to a new term, the AOE intends to align practice statewide with the goal
of the new regulations to streamline and improve processes.
Special Education Evaluation
Implementation Guide (August 3, 2022)
revised November10, 2022
Page 49 of 101
Figure 6-1: Eligibility Criteria for All Disability Categories Except SLD and Deaf-Blindness
Special Education Evaluation
Implementation Guide (August 3, 2022)
revised November10, 2022
Page 50 of 101
Figure 6-2: Eligibility Criteria for Specific Learning Disability
Special Education Evaluation
Implementation Guide (August 3, 2022)
revised November10, 2022
Page 51 of 101
Figure 6-3: Eligibility Criteria for Deaf-Blindness
6.2 Reconvening the EPT
It is the responsibility of the EPT to make the Eligibility Determination, and consequently, the
EPT should be reconvened following the Assessment Process. As a reminder, the following
members of the EPT must be present:
An LEA representative who is qualified to provide or supervise Special Education
services, knowledgeable about general education, and knowledgeable about available
LEA resources.
At least one special educator of the child and if appropriate, one Special Education
service provider for the child.
At least one general education teacher of the child (if the child may participate in the
general education environment).
An individual who can interpret the instructional implication of evaluation results.
Special Education Evaluation
Implementation Guide (August 3, 2022)
revised November10, 2022
Page 52 of 101
The parent(s).
The child, when appropriate.
Other individuals who have knowledge or expertise regarding the child, at the
discretion of the parent and LEA.
For a child suspected of having a SLD, the EPT must also include:
The child’s general education teacher or a general education teacher qualified to teach a
child of that age.
At least one person qualified to conduct individual diagnostic examinations of children
(e.g., school psychologist, speech, and language pathologist).
At this meeting, the EPT works through each of the Eligibility Criteria, attempting to reach a
decision by consensus. However, if the EPT cannot reach consensus, the LEA representative
shall make the final decision. The EPT may decide to use the Special Education Evaluation Plan
and Report (Form 2) that was introduced in Section 4
to document their decisions throughout
the Eligibility Determination process.
6.3 Eligibility Criterion One: Disability Determination
The first step in Eligibility Determination is to determine whether the child has a disability,
called the Disability Determination. The EPT will review assessment results conducted as part
of the Assessment Process, other assessments such as classroom or State tests, information
provided by the parent, observation notes, and other relevant documentation. Starting from the
Suspected Disability determined during Assessment Planning, the EPT will discuss whether the
student has the disability suspected or whether a different disability is present based on the
results of the available data.
There are 13 different disability categories under which school-aged students may be eligible for
Special Education services:
1. Autism Spectrum Disorder
2. Deaf-Blindness
3. Emotional Disturbance
4. Hearing Impairment
5. Intellectual Disability
6. Multiple Disabilities
7. Orthopedic Impairment
8. Other Health Impairment (ex: ADHD, Epilepsy, etc.)
Special Education Evaluation
Implementation Guide (August 3, 2022)
revised November10, 2022
Page 53 of 101
9. Specific Learning Disability (such as dyslexia, dyscalculia, dysgraphia, and other
learning issues)
10. Speech or Language Impairment
11. Traumatic Brain Injury
12. Deafness
13. Visual Impairment, including Blindness
While more than one disability category may be listed on the IEP (if the student qualifies as
eligible under more than one disability category), the EPT should identify what
category best fits when reviewing the relevant information about the child, listing
that category first. The checklist below may serve as a guide for Teams making
these decisions (a printable version of this checklist is available in Appendix C
).
Disability Characteristics Checklist
Use this chart to identify whether a student has a disability under one of the categories outlined by IDEA.
Autism Spectrum Disorder
Significantly affects verbal and non-verbal communication and social interaction
Generally evident before age three
Engagement in repetitive activities and stereotyped movements
Resistance to environmental change or change in daily routines
Unusual responses to sensory experiences
May be diagnosed as autism, pervasive developmental disorder – not otherwise
specified, Rett’s Disorder, Asperger’s Disorder, childhood disintegrative disorder
Characteristics vary from mild to severe and in the number of symptoms present
Usually needs an opinion of a licensed psychologist or doctor with expertise as to the
existence of this disability
Special Education Evaluation
Implementation Guide (August 3, 2022)
revised November10, 2022
Page 54 of 101
Deaf-Blindness
Concomitant hearing and visual impairments, which when combined causes severe
communication, developmental and educational needs that they cannot be
accommodated in Special Education programs solely for children with deafness or
children with blindness
Emotional Disturbance
Exhibits one or more of the following characteristics over a long period of time and to a
marked degree
Inability to learn that cannot be explained by intellectual, sensory, or health factors
Inability to build or maintain satisfactory interpersonal relationships with peers and
teachers
Inappropriate types of behaviors or feelings under normal circumstances
General pervasive mood of unhappiness or depression
Tendency to develop physical symptoms or fears associated with personal or school
problems
Usually needs an opinion of a licensed psychologist or psychiatrist as to the existence of
this disability
10
10
Upon determination of the existence of an emotional disturbance, the LEA must inform the
parent of the availability of interagency coordination of services.
Special Education Evaluation
Implementation Guide (August 3, 2022)
revised November10, 2022
Page 55 of 101
Hearing Loss
Deafness or hard of hearing in one or both ears, with or without amplification
Demonstrated by a 25 decibel HL threshold (ANSI, 69) or worse for one or more of the
frequencies 250-8000HZ
Determined by an audiologist, otologist, or otolaryngologist
Intellectual Disability
Delay in learning of sufficient magnitude to cause a student’s performance to fall at or
below -1.5 standard deviations from the mean of a test of intellectual ability, existing
concurrently with deficits in adaptive behavior
Note about Social Maladjustment: A student who is socially maladjusted without one or
more of the criteria listed above should not be considered to have an emotional disturbance.
Social maladjustment is a persistent pattern of violating social norms and is marked by
struggle with authority, low frustration threshold, impulsivity, or manipulative behaviors.
To qualify for the emotional disturbance disability category for Special Education, children
with social maladjustment often have some of the following:
Unhappiness or depression that is not pervasive;
Problem behaviors that are goal-directed, self-serving, and manipulative;
Actions that are based on perceived self-interest even though others may consider
the behavior to be self-defeating;
General social conventions and behavioral standards are understood but not
accepted;
Negative counter-cultural standards or peers are accepted and followed;
Problem behaviors have escalated during pre-adolescence or adolescence;
Inappropriate behaviors are displayed in selected settings or situations (e.g., only at
home, in school, or in selected classes), while other behavior is appropriately
controlled; and/or
Problem behaviors are frequently the result of encouragement by a peer group, are
intentional, and the student understands the consequences of such behaviors.
Special Education Evaluation
Implementation Guide (August 3, 2022)
revised November10, 2022
Page 56 of 101
Multiple Disabilities
Concomitant impairments (such as intellectual disability-blindness or intellectual
disability-orthopedic impairment) the combination of which causes such severe
educational needs that they cannot be accommodated in Special Education programs
solely for one of the impairments
Does not include Deaf-Blindness
Orthopedic Impairment
Includes impairments caused by a congenital anomaly, disease (e.g., poliomyelitis, bone
tuberculosis), or other causes (e.g., cerebral palsy, amputation, fractures or burns that
cause contractures)
Determined by a licensed physician
Other Health Impairment
Limited strength, vitality, or alertness, including a heightened alertness to
environmental stimuli, that results in limited alertness in the educational environment
Due to chronic or acute health problems such as asthma, attention deficit disorder or
attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, diabetes, epilepsy, a heart condition,
hemophilia, lead poisoning, leukemia, nephritis, rheumatic fever, sickle cell anemia,
non-verbal learning disability, Tourette syndrome
Determined by a person whose professional licensure authorizes the offering of an
opinion on the existence of the specific condition and who has specific training and
experience in diagnosing and recommending treatment for the specific condition
suspected
Specific Learning Disability
Disorder in one or more of the basic psychological processes involved in understanding
or in using language, spoken, or written
May manifest itself in the imperfect ability to listen, think, speak, read, write, spell, or do
mathematical calculations
Includes conditions such as perceptual disabilities, brain injury, minimal brain
dysfunction, dyslexia, and developmental aphasia
Special Education Evaluation
Implementation Guide (August 3, 2022)
revised November10, 2022
Page 57 of 101
Does not include a learning problem that is primarily the result of visual, hearing, or
motor disabilities, intellectual disability, emotional disturbance, or environmental,
cultural, or economic disadvantage
Speech and Language Impairment
Communication disorder, such as stuttering, impaired articulation, a language or voice
impairment, that adversely effects a student’s educational performance
Demonstrated by significant deficits in listening comprehension or oral expression
Determined by a licensed speech-language pathologist
Note about determining Speech and Language Impairment: VT regulations set forth
additional specific criteria for identifying SLI:
Listening Comprehension - At least 2.0 standard deviations below the mean on at least one
composite score and other measures of auditory processing or comprehension of connected
speech, including phonology, morphology, syntax, semantics, and pragmatics.
Oral Expression - Child demonstrates one or more of the following conditions
:
• A significant deficit in voice when (a) an otolaryngologist has documented that
treatment is indicated for a vocal pathology or speech related medical condition; and
(b) abnormal vocal characteristics in pitch, quality, nasality, volume, or beath
support for more than one month.
• A significant deficit in fluency when (a) part word repetitions or sound prolongations
occur on at least 5% of the words spoken in two or more speech samples; (b) sound
or silent prolongations exceed one second in two or more speech samples; or (c)
secondary symptoms or signs of tension or struggle during speech which are so
severe as to interfere with the flow of communication.
• A significant deficit in articulation attributed to an organic or functional disorder
when (a) the student is unable to articulate two or more of the unrelated phonemes
in connected speech (see Chart in Vt. Rule 2362.2(j) for phonemes); and (b) it is not
attributed to dialect or second language difficulties.
• A significant deficit in oral discourse exists when a student demonstrates a deficit of
at least 2.0 standard deviations below the mean on at least one composite score and
other measures of oral discourse, including phonology, morphology, syntax,
semantics, and pragmatics.
Special Education Evaluation
Implementation Guide (August 3, 2022)
revised November10, 2022
Page 58 of 101
Traumatic Brain Injury
Injury to the brain caused by an external physical force or by an internal occurrence such
as a stroke or aneurysm, resulting in total or partial functional disability or psychosocial
impairment, or both
Includes open or closed head injuries resulting in impairments in on or more areas
including:
• Cognition
• Language
• Memory
• Attention
• Reasoning
• Abstract thinking
• Judgment
• Problem solving
• Sensory, perceptual, and motor abilities
• Psychosocial behavior
• Physical functions
• Information processing
• Speech
Does not include brain injuries that are congenital or degenerative, or brain injuries
induced by birth trauma
Determined by a licensed physician
Visual Impairment
An impairment in vision, including:
• Blindness and partial sight
• A visual acuity of 20/70 or less in the better eye
• Reduced visual field to 20 degrees
• A diagnosis of cortical visual impairment
• A diagnosis of a degenerative condition that is likely to result in a significant
loss of vision
• Other vision condition such as convergence insufficiency disorder
Determined by an optometrist or ophthalmologist
Special Education Evaluation
Implementation Guide (August 3, 2022)
revised November10, 2022
Page 59 of 101
While the IDEA classifications provide some detail about what characteristics
need to be present in a student to qualify for a disability, the information listed is
still very qualitative and does not provide concrete eligibility benchmarks or
“cutoff scores.” LEAs or schools should be very clear about what benchmarks
should be met to classify for each disability category.
6.3.1 Specific Learning Disability
Due to the recent rule changes, the criteria for SLD determination have changed
slightly to no longer include a separate Adverse Effect consideration. Instead, the
determination of an SLD inherently includes evidence that the student’s
educational performance has been impacted. The LEA must decide whether to use
a model based on whether the student responds to scientific, research-based
intervention or use a model based on alternative research-based procedures for determining
whether a student has an SLD.
Five Key Elements
Regardless of the strategy and LEA is using to determine eligibility for SLD, the elements for
making the determination that a student with SLD’s performance is adversely impacting their
learning are the same:
Element 1: The student demonstrates a lack of adequate achievement in one of the Basic Skill
areas when provided with learning experiences and instruction appropriate for the
student’s age or State-approved grade-level standards.
Element 2: The student demonstrates a lack of progress when provided with scientific,
research-based instruction and interventions.
Element 3: Underachievement is not the result of exclusionary factors, including visual,
hearing or motor disability, intellectual disability, emotional disturbance, cultural
factors, environmental or economic disadvantage, limited English Proficiency, or
lack of instruction in reading or math.
Element 4: Observational data of academic and behavioral performance within the classroom
reflects area(s) of concern.
Element 5: Documented parental notifications and participation throughout the process.
Special Education Evaluation
Implementation Guide (August 3, 2022)
revised November10, 2022
Page 60 of 101
The Five Key Elements are broken down further in the State regulations, and
explained more comprehensively in the document,
Specific Learning Disabilities:
Guidelines for Determining Eligibility. The Checklist below operationalizes the
Five Key Elements to support the EPT with making an SLD determination.
SLD Eligibility Checklist
The following areas and criteria must be documented before or during the Assessment Process
to determine the existence of SLD:
Lack of Adequate Achievement in a Basic Skill Area
When provided with learning experiences and instruction appropriate for the students age or
VT grade-level standards, the student does not achieve adequately in one or more of the
following areas:
Oral expression
Listening comprehension
Written expression
Basic reading skills
Reading fluency skills
Reading comprehension
Mathematics calculation
Mathematics problem solving.
Lack of Progress Following Intervention
The student does not make sufficient progress to meet age or VT grade-level standards
in one of the areas listed above when using a model based on whether the student
responds to scientific, research-based intervention.
Documented Areas of Difficulty in Classroom
A member of the EPT (other than the student’s current teacher), who is trained in
observation has observed the student and the learning environment (including the
Special Education Evaluation
Implementation Guide (August 3, 2022)
revised November10, 2022
Page 61 of 101
general classroom setting) and has documented academic performance and behavior
challenges in the areas of difficulty.
11
Performance Not Due to Exclusionary Factors
The EPT has determined that the student’s performance is not primarily the result of:
A visual, hearing or motor disability
Intellectual disability
Emotional disturbance
Cultural factors
Environmental or economic disadvantage
Limited English proficiency
A lack of appropriate instruction/intervention (delivered in a manner that is highly
consistent with the design, closely aligned to student need, culturally appropriate, and
includes the essential components of core instruction).
12
11
One form that can be used to document the classroom observation is the AOE’s Systematic Observation
of Learner – Core Instruction.
12
Recall that for these factors, the emphasis is on singularity. There may be instances where some of these
factors do adversely affect student performance without being the primary factor of the student’s
challenges. In these cases, the EPT should consider the degree to which each factor may adversely affect
the student’s achievement.
Note about Determining Lack of Appropriate Instruction and Intervention: To make
this determination, the EPT should consider:
• Data that demonstrate that, prior to or as part of the referral process, the student
was provided appropriate instruction in general education settings, delivered by
qualified personnel; and
• Data-based documentation of repeated assessment of achievement at reasonable
intervals, reflecting formal assessment of student progress during instruction
(which was provided to the student’s parents).
Special Education Evaluation
Implementation Guide (August 3, 2022)
revised November10, 2022
Page 62 of 101
Similar to how it manifests in Assessment Planning, the EPT should be cognizant
of the added implications of determining eligibility for linguistically diverse
students. Table 6-4 provides several considerations for EPTs to use when
considering eligibility for these students.
Eligibility Determination Considerations
EPTs may want to take the following steps to ensure careful consideration:
Review progress monitoring data collected over time to gauge the student’s response to
appropriate, targeted, or intensive intervention and compare the results with those of a
comparable group of learners. Consider whether the growth realized by the student is
sufficient to close the achievement gap within a reasonable length of time through
general education alone.
Use informal measures to supplement standardized test scores, including dynamic
assessment strategies.
Interpret evaluation data within a team setting that includes the parent(s)/family.
Consider students’ skills in English and their native languages and create classrooms
that value their cultural and linguistic backgrounds.
(Colorado Department of Education, 2017)
6.3.2 Deaf-Blindness
Due to the upcoming rule changes, the criteria for identifying students with Deaf-
Blindness no longer explicitly include Adverse Effect (similar to SLD). Instead, the
determination of Deaf-Blindness inherently includes evidence that the student’s
educational performance has been impacted. To be eligible, the LEA must
demonstrate that the student’s disability causes severe communication,
developmental, and educational needs that cannot be accommodated in Special Education
programs solely for children with deafness or children with blindness.
Special Education Evaluation
Implementation Guide (August 3, 2022)
revised November10, 2022
Page 63 of 101
6.4 Eligibility Criterion Two: Adverse Effect Determination
Determining Adverse Effect is an important step in determining eligibility, as the EPT now
consolidates all of the assessment evidence and decides whether certain benchmarks are met to
demonstrate that the student’s disability has caused an Adverse Effect on the student’s
educational performance. For more information about the rule changes related to Adverse
Effect, see the Adverse Effect Memorandum and the
Three Gate Eligibility Determination – A
Vermont Agency of Education Guidance Document, and the Eligibility Determination Form.
Adverse Effect means to have a negative impact on the Basic Skills areas. The impact does not
need to be substantial, significant, or marked. It is more than a minor or transient hindrance,
evidenced by findings and observations based on data sources and objective assessments with
replicable results. An Adverse Effect on educational performance does not include a
developmentally appropriate characteristic of age/grade peers in the general population.
To determine Adverse Effect is present, the EPT must:
Identify areas of Adverse Effect due to disability in the Basic Skills areas using a range of
diagnostic and performance data appropriate to the student.
Consider academic and non-academic aspects of the student’s functioning in making the
determination.
Document the impact of the Adverse Effect on educational performance to substantiate
that the educational deficiencies persist or will persist over time despite specific
alternative strategies that are provided within the general education setting.
Note about Basic Skills: As defined in Section 5, Basic Skills areas are:
• Oral expression
• Listening comprehension
• Written expression
• Basic reading skills
• Reading comprehension
• Mathematics calculation
• Mathematics reasoning
• Motor skills
• Functional skills2
Special Education Evaluation
Implementation Guide (August 3, 2022)
revised November10, 2022
Page 64 of 101
Consider the impact of scientific, research-based interventions and document that these
strategies have been implemented with fidelity.
An Adverse Effect is not present if:
The determinant factor for the decision is the lack of instruction in (a) reading; (b) math;
or (c) limited English proficiency.
The child does not otherwise meet Eligibility Criteria.
For determination of Adverse Effect, while State regulations do not indicate a required number
of measures, an EPT should use multiple pieces of evidence in order to get a full picture of the
student’s educational performance.
There are many sources of data that may be used to make the Adverse Effect
decision. The Adverse Effect Evidence Source Checklist represents a checklist of
the types of evidence that may be helpful for school-aged children, many of which
will be collected as part of the Assessment Process.
Adverse Effect Evidence Source Checklist
Nationally normed, individually administered achievement test(s)
Nationally normed, group-administered achievement test(s), including nationally
normed, curriculum-based measures
Reports prepared by the LEA or presented by the parent
Performance on comprehensive assessments based on a system of learning results, or the
Common Core as of 2014
Criterion-referenced assessments
Student’s work products, language samples, or portfolios
Disciplinary evidence
Student’s attendance
Social, behavioral, or emotional deficits (if any)
Special Education Evaluation
Implementation Guide (August 3, 2022)
revised November10, 2022
Page 65 of 101
LEAs may use the Eligibility Determination Form
to help them work through these
considerations. Additionally, this Memorandum about Adverse Effect may
provide additional support regarding the rule changes and the impact on LEA
practice.
6.5 Eligibility Criterion Three: Special Education Determination
For the final step of the Eligibility Determination, the EPT must determine whether a student
requires Special Education. Figure 6-4 breaks down this decision into its components.
Figure 6-4: Criterion Three in Eligibility Determination
In order to make this decision, its essential to understand the definition of Special
Education (especially because this definition has changed with the 2022 rule changes).
Special Education means Specially Designed Instruction, provided at no cost to the
parents, to meet the unique needs of a child with a disability, including:
Instruction conducted in the classroom, in the home, in hospitals and institutions, and in
other settings; and
Instruction in physical education.
Specially Designed Instruction (SDI) means adapting, as appropriate to the needs of an eligible
child, the content, methodology, or delivery of instruction to address the unique needs of the
child that result from the child’s disability, and to ensure access of the child to the general
curriculum, so that the child can meet the educational standards within the State that apply to
Special Education Evaluation
Implementation Guide (August 3, 2022)
revised November10, 2022
Page 66 of 101
all children. For more information, see the AOE’s Specially Designed Instruction Handout and
Specially Designed Instruction Handout: Part II.
The following chart briefly describes example student profiles and a possible
outcome for Eligibility Criterion Three. Note that EPTs will have more
information to consider when making these decisions, but this visual represents
an abbreviated version to illustrate how the Special Education requirement might
be determined.
Table 6-1: Example Special Education Eligibility Decisions
Student Profile EPT Decision
A student with a medical diagnosis of ADHD
who is struggling to make progress in class
due to inattention and distractions during
instruction.
This student does not require Special
Education and instead could be supported
with various attention ‘fidgets’ and frequent
breaks to support continued focus.
A student with a Specific Learning Disability
is not making progress in the general
education classroom because of deficits in
reading comprehension, as well as delays in
speech and language.
This student would benefit from speech and
language related services as well as push-in
or pull-out Special Education targeted at
improving their reading.
A student with a speech and language
disability is making progress in the general
education classroom, though with some
difficulty; however, they require continued
speech and language services to address the
deficits in their language acquisition.
The student should receive an IEP with
speech related Special Education. The EPT
should share any academic data with the IEP
Team to help inform programmatic decision
and ensure consultation opportunities
between the Speech/Language Pathologist
and the student’s teachers.
Special Education Evaluation
Implementation Guide (August 3, 2022)
revised November10, 2022
Page 67 of 101
6.6 Timelines, Consent, and Documentation
With the determination decision, the EPT shall prepare a written final report that documents its
reasoning. When a student is found eligible for Special Education, the report will be provided to
the parent and made available for the IEP Team to use in program planning. LEAs
can use the checklists below to ensure the report contains the required
information. The Evaluation Plan and Report (Form 2
) is a resource that ensures
these requirements have been met. The EPT Evaluation Plan and Report Checklist
(non-SLD) can be used for students suspected of having all disability categories
except SLD.
EPT Evaluation Plan and Report Checklist (non-SLD)
Conclusion and Rationale
A statement of the Team’s conclusion as to whether the student is eligible for Special
Education
An explanation of the Team’s rationale based on:
o The presence or absence of a disability
o (Not Deaf-Blindness) If there is a disability, whether it has an Adverse Effect on
educational performance in one or more of the Basic Skill areas
13
o Whether the student needs Special Education services to benefit from the
educational program and support cannot be provided through the educational
support system, standard instructional conditions, or supplementary aids and
services provided in the school
Evaluation Procedures
A description of any modifications or changes made from the evaluation procedures
specified in the evaluation plan
Changes in test administration that were made to ensure that the assessment was:
o Not discriminatory on a racial or cultural basis
13
Due to the upcoming rule changes, the criteria for identifying students with Deaf-Blindness no longer
explicitly include Adverse Effect. Instead, the determination of Deaf-Blindness inherently includes
evidence that the student’s educational performance has been impacted.
Special Education Evaluation
Implementation Guide (August 3, 2022)
revised November10, 2022
Page 68 of 101
o Administered in the student’s native language or to account for other mode of
communication
o Administered in the form most likely to yield accurate information on what the
student knows and can do academically, developmentally, and functionally
o Used for the purpose for which the assessment is valid and reliable
o Administered by trained and knowledgeable personnel
o Administered in accordance with any instructions provided by the producer of
the assessment
Tailored to assess specific areas of educational need and not merely those that are
designed to provide a single general intelligence quotient
Summary of Factors Considered
Inclusion of all educationally relevant information collected during evaluation,
including educational, medical, and psychological information
The written report of an observation of the student if an observation has been conducted
All other factors considered
Recommendations for IEP Team
Recommendations as to the need for accommodations in curriculum, assessments,
material, or programmatic adaptation, behavior management interventions, and
supplemental aids and services
Members of the EPT
The initials of all Team members indicating agreement or disagreement with the
eligibility conclusion
A Team member who does not agree with the conclusion will submit a separate
statement presenting the member’s conclusion and this statement shall also become part
of the report
For students with SLD, in addition to the Evaluation Plan and Report (Form 2
),
Teams have the option of using the Determination of Eligibility: Specific Learning
Disability Form to document their decisions and cover each of the considerations
listed below. The EPT Evaluation Plan and Report Checklist provides a double
check for LEAs completing the final report for a student with an SLD.
Special Education Evaluation
Implementation Guide (August 3, 2022)
revised November10, 2022
Page 69 of 101
EPT Evaluation Plan and Report Checklist (SLD)
Conclusion and Rationale
Whether the student has a SLD
The basis for making the determination, including assurances that the determination has
been made in accordance with applicable law
Specific Findings
The relevant behavior, if any, noted during the observation of the student and the
relationship of that behavior to the student’s academic functioning
Any educationally relevant medical findings
Whether the student does not achieve adequately for the student’s age or to meet State
grade-level standards in one or more of the Basic Skill areas, when provided with
appropriate learning experiences and instruction
Whether the student exhibits a pattern of strengths and weaknesses in performance,
achievement, or both, relative to age, State grade-level standards and expectations, or
intellectual development consistent with the characteristics of an SLD
The determination of the EPT concerning the effects of visual, hearing, or motor
disability; intellectual disability; emotional disturbance; cultural factors; environmental
or economic disadvantage; or limited English proficiency on the student’s achievement
level
If the student participated in a process that assesses the student’s response to scientific,
research-based intervention:
o The intervention strategies used, and the student-centered data collected; and
o The documentation that the student’s parents were notified about (a) the amount
and nature of the student performance data that would be collected and the
general education services that would be provided; (b) strategies for increasing
the student’s rate of learning; and (c) the parent’s right to request an evaluation
6.7 Students Found Ineligible for Special Education Services
In some instances, an EPT may determine that a student is ineligible for Special Education
services. A student may be found ineligible for Special Education services if:
Special Education Evaluation
Implementation Guide (August 3, 2022)
revised November10, 2022
Page 70 of 101
• The student does not meet the criteria for one of the disabilities recognized within
Special Education.
• The student has a disability but there is no documented Adverse Effect or
educational impact.
• The Team determines the educational impact caused by the student’s disability can
be addressed within the education system and does not constitute the need for
Special Education.
In the event that the EPT determines a student is ineligible for services, there are a number of
pathways they can recommend to meet the needs of the student outside of Special Education
services. Potential solutions for continued support include:
1. Identification of classroom accommodations that may support the student’s learning
style.
2. Continued supports through the LEA’s System of supports (including behavior supports
such as a Functional Behavior Assessment and Behavior Intervention Plan).
3. Provision of extra tutoring or other supports outside of school (e.g., connecting families
with community organizations who can provide additional support).
4. Development of a Section 504 Plan.
6.7.1 Section 504 Plan
If a student is found to have a disability that does not require Special Education, a Section 504
Plan may provide them with the necessary accommodations to progress within the general
education curriculum. As explained earlier, Section 504 protects any individual with disabilities
from discriminatory practices including equitable access to participate in public programs and
services - including school.
In the school context, a 504 Plan is a document that outlines the accommodations
a student will receive to help access the general education curriculum. The rules
for creating and implementing those plans vary from IEPs and it is important for
LEAs to have clear processes for ensuring students receive services as set forth on
their 504 Plans.
While consistent use of screening data to proactively identify student need and the ongoing
collection of data to track student progress is key to a system of supports provided to all
students, it is especially important for students who do not meet eligibility for Special
Education services but have clear and concrete needs that impact their learning. Recall that a
Special Education Evaluation
Implementation Guide (August 3, 2022)
revised November10, 2022
Page 71 of 101
system of supports is implemented at the school level to ensure that students receive all the
support they need – and this includes students found ineligible for Special Education services
and students with 504 Plans, as well as students with IEPs who may need support or
intervention outside of their Special Education services.
While a 504 Plan or even documented support through system of supports may not have the
same implications for student’s educational program as an IEP, the implementation of evidence-
based interventions should be monitored to assess the need for changes or increases in support
given to the student.
6.7.2 Parental Rights to Respond to Ineligibility Determination
If a parent disagrees with the EPT’s determination that a student is ineligible for Special
Education, they can pursue several next steps to respond to the Team’s decision:
1. Discuss their concerns at the EPT meeting.
2. Request an Independent Educational Evaluation.
3. File a complaint if the additional data from the IEE still does not warrant eligibility and
solve conflict through mediation.
4. File a Due Process lawsuit if necessary (only used in extreme cases).
6.7.3 Independent Educational Evaluation
Parents have the right to ask for an Independent Educational Evaluation (IEE) if they disagree
with the evaluation that was conducted or obtained by an LEA. The IEE must be conducted by a
qualified examiner who is not an employee of the LEA, and the LEA must either pay the full
cost of the evaluation or ensure that the evaluation is administered at no cost to the parent. The
parent may request one IEE for each evaluation completed by the LEA with which it disagrees.
If the parent requests an IEE, the LEA may ask for the reason why the parent objects to the
LEA’s evaluation; however, the parent is not required to provide an explanation.
After the parent requests the IEE, the LEA must (without unnecessary delay):
• Initiate a hearing to show that the evaluation conducted by the LEA was appropriate.
• Ensure that the IEE is completed at no cost to the parent.
LEAs are required to provide parents with information about where they may obtain the IEE
including the location of the evaluation and the qualification of the examiner. Any criteria for
Special Education Evaluation
Implementation Guide (August 3, 2022)
revised November10, 2022
Page 72 of 101
the IEE must be the same as the criteria for the evaluations conducted by the LEA. An LEA may
not establish any criteria or impose any timelines on this process that interfere with the parent’s
right to an IEE. For more information on Independent Educational Evaluations
, see the Vermont
Notice of Procedural Safeguards.
6.8 Conclusion
Once the EPT has completed the Assessment Process, it must get together to make an Eligibility
Determination. There are Three Eligibility Criteria to consider when making this decision
generally, whether:
1. The child has a disability;
2. The disability causes an Adverse Effect (except SLD and Deaf-Blindness); and
3. The child requires Special Education to benefit from the educational program.
While it may sometimes be challenging to differentiate the components of each part of this
determination, Teams should engage in a deep conversation about the student’s unique
educational needs and how the LEA can best address those needs going forward.
A Note about IEEs and Due Process: An LEA may pursue mediation or due process to
demonstrate that an IEE obtained by a parent does not meet LEA criteria. If the final decision
of that hearing is that the LEA’s original evaluation is appropriate, the parent still has the
right to the IEE, but not at the LEA’s expense.
Special Education Evaluation
Implementation Guide (August 3, 2022)
revised November10, 2022
Page 73 of 101
Key Questions for LEAs:
As a check for implementation/readiness, LEAs can ask themselves the following questions:
What will be our benchmarks for the disability categories that EPTs should use
to determine a student’s eligibility for Special Education services?
What training or support do our EPT members need to effectively determine a
student’s eligibility in accordance with the new Special Education rules?
How do we ensure the assessment results reviewed by the EPT consider
linguistically diverse students?
Does the LEA have a process for creating and implementing 504 Plans for
students who need them? How can those resources be maximized to ensure
possible alignment with resources dedicated to both a System of supports and
Special Education services?
Special Education Evaluation
Implementation Guide (August 3, 2022)
revised November10, 2022
Page 74 of 101
SECTION 7: PLANNING FOR SERVICES
7.1 Introduction to Planning for Services
Planning for Services is the connection between the Evaluation
Process and the development of a student’s Individualized
Education Program (IEP) consisting of a series of activities that
formalize the student’s eligibility for Special Education services
which are then documented in the IEP.
As mentioned in Section 6.4, decisions made as part of Eligibility
Criterion Three relate specifically to the question of a student’s
need for Special Education as a necessary service or
intervention. The EPT will make recommendations about
possible services that the student may benefit from and document those along with its rationale
in the final evaluation report. The report, once transferred to the IEP Team, then becomes the
foundation for the IEP Team to draft a program for the student that is aligned to their needs.
7.2 Planning for Services in the IEP
Student needs are specifically addressed through the development of the IEP. The IEP Team
should consider the program and placement options available for a student along the
continuum of services their LEA provides. In addition, the assessment data that was considered
during Eligibility Determination should inform the present levels of performance and
discussion of services to ensure that program recommendations will sufficiently meet the
student’s needs.
Essential to the creation of an IEP document is the IEP Team’s determination of the types of
support and services that are likely to offer the student an Educational Benefit. Educational
Benefit means that LEAs are responsible for ensuring that certain standards of IEP creation and
service planning are upheld.
In developing a student's IEP, it is the responsibility of the IEP Team to recommend
individualized goals and services that will enable the student to make progress in the general
education curriculum. Members of the IEP Team will consider both the State's learning
standards as well as the school-based instructional curriculum (which should be aligned to the
State’s learning standards). Key considerations for the development of an IEP that facilitates
Educational Benefit include:
Special Education Evaluation
Implementation Guide (August 3, 2022)
revised November10, 2022
Page 75 of 101
Clear articulation of the student’s present levels of performance in all areas of need,
including functional and academic skills that reflect the analysis in the evaluation
assessment reports
Development of clear and measurable goals that assume high-expectations and are
aligned to grade-level standards and the student’s present levels of performance
Identification of how Special Education will be provided in the context of supporting
students in the LRE
Clear alignment between present levels of performance, annual goals, and services
If appropriate, identification of how students will be prepared for adult living
Each of these considerations will have been discussed by the EPT during the Evaluation
Process, so it is helpful to develop procedures to ensure that IEP teams have access to this
learning (e.g., frequently, the same people are part of both processes).
7.3 Key Tips for Planning of Support
Ensuring alignment between a student’s current performance and planned services is essential
for the creation of a quality IEP and IEP Teams can call upon assessment data and
other information to ensure this alignment. Table 7-1 illustrates some examples of
how this plays out in practice. This is also an opportunity for Teams to consider a
student’s Functional Performance and develop goals to address these needs.
A Note about Educational Benefit Review: An LEA is responsible for ensuring all involved
in creating an IEP have training in creating/reviewing IEPs that ensure they are “reasonably
calculated” to create the likelihood of the student achieving educational benefit. The AOE
offers training to LEAs upon request through the Professional Development Request Form
.
Special Education Evaluation
Implementation Guide (August 3, 2022)
revised November10, 2022
Page 76 of 101
Table 7-1: Connections between Evaluation and IEP Processes
IEP Component
Connections to Evaluation Process
Present Levels of Performance
Assessment results, scores, and narrative with
interpretation may be included as part of this section.
Annual Goals
Using the current performance data and areas
identified for improvement in the Assessment Process,
IEP teams review the Evaluation Plan and Report to
craft goals for the student.
For additional supports on writing annual goals refer
to:
• IEP Goal Writing: Introduction
• IEP Goal Writing: Grade Level Standards
• IEP Goal Writing: SMART Goals
• IEP Goal Writing: Using Data
Specially Designed Instruction and
Supplementary Supports
To create a program aligned to present levels and
goals, consider the following:
• The basic skill shown to have an Adverse Effect
on performance
• Impact on performance in other areas of
development
• Impact of disability on functional skills
specifically
7.4 Timelines, Consents and Documentation
A student’s first IEP is developed within 30 days of their Special Education eligibility meeting,
and it is the IEP Team that is responsible for developing and implementing the IEP.
Upon completion of the IEP, Parental Consent is needed before implementing services. For
more about parent engagement and Consent, see Section 4
.
Special Education Evaluation
Implementation Guide (August 3, 2022)
revised November10, 2022
Page 77 of 101
7.5 Conclusion
There are many ins and outs related to creating and implementing quality IEPs which are not
covered in the Guide. The key piece for the Evaluation Process is the connection between (a) the
valuable evidence gathered about the student throughout the process and (b) ensuring it is used
to inform a robust conversation about student needs and services required to help the student
make progress.
Key Questions for LEAs:
As a check for implementation/readiness, LEAs can ask themselves the following questions:
Can we ensure in every case, the Evaluation Plan and Report is sent to the
parents and the IEP team to help inform the IEP creation process?
Do we have processes by which the relevant community partners have time
and coverage to participate in all required meetings – and have they been
trained to understand their roles and responsibilities in the Special Education
process?
Have members of the IEP team received sufficient training in the Educational
Benefit Review process?
Special Education Evaluation
Implementation Guide (August 3, 2022)
revised November10, 2022
Page 78 of 101
SECTION 8: REEVALUATION
8.1 Overview of the Reevaluation Process
The LEA is required to conduct a Reevaluation to determine a student’s continued eligibility for
Special Education and related services at least every three years. This is referred to as a
Mandated Three-Year Evaluation. However, Reevaluations can also be requested by a parent,
staff, or other relevant community partner at any time if they deem it necessary to collect
additional information to determine support for a student. However, Reevaluations should not
be requested more than once annually (absent extenuating circumstances).
During the Mandated Three-Year Evaluation, the LEA can determine that new assessments are
not needed and, with Parental Consent, opt to review existing data to determine continued
eligibility. Parents should be notified of their right to request new testing to inform the
determination of continued eligibility.
Because the steps of the Evaluation Process have been reviewed in depth throughout the Guide,
this Section will only briefly refer to components of the process that remain the same as an
Initial Evaluation. Where the processes vary, they will be noted below. It’s important to recall
that because a student has already been deemed eligible for Special Education services when a
Reevaluation is conducted (though the Reevaluation’s purpose is to verify continued eligibility),
the first step of the Initial Evaluation Process (Initial Referral) is not necessary.
A Note on Parental Consent: Parents must agree to foregoing new assessments and document
it with the LEA. The Written Agreement Between Parents and District Re-evaluations Form
(Form 8
) provides a template.
If the EPT determines the need for additional testing but cannot secure Parental Consent, the
LEA may seek consent through mediation or due process. (The Guide does not cover due
process or mediation. For more information about those processes, see the Vermont Agency of
Education website
or connect with the AOE’s technical assistance line at
aoe.specialed@vermont.gov or (802) 828-1256).
Further, if an Evaluation Plan is created and the Parent refuses to consent to one part of the
Plan, the LEA must still proceed with the other assessments.
Special Education Evaluation
Implementation Guide (August 3, 2022)
revised November10, 2022
Page 79 of 101
8.2 Assessment Process
For Mandated Three-Year Evaluations, LEAs should begin planning well before the IEP due
date to ensure that all relevant processes can be completed. The EPT is convened to kick off
Assessment Planning. In many LEAs, EPTs and IEP Teams consist of the same group of
professionals and in this case, can be responsible for both oversight and implementation of all
Reevaluation activities.
As part of the Reevaluation Process, the EPT determines if new or additional
assessments are needed. The following steps provide a structure for making these
decisions.
Table 8-1: Reevaluation Assessment Planning Steps
Step
Considerations
Review existing reports and
data
Example data:
• Teacher and related service provider reports
• Classroom assessments
• Student work samples
• Standardized testing
• Progress reports
• Evaluations and information provided by the parent
Review the student’s current
IEP document
Pay close attention to the Present Levels section to identify
additional student needs that were previously not listed or
determination of supports no longer needed
Consider whether new
assessments are necessary
Will new assessments provide the EPT with information to:
• Determine continued eligibility
• Identify additional Special Education needs
• Identify whether any additions or modifications to
the student’s program or services are needed to
enable the student to meet the goals on his/her IEP
and to participate as appropriate in general education
Special Education Evaluation
Implementation Guide (August 3, 2022)
revised November10, 2022
Page 80 of 101
Questions to guide planning for the Reevaluation can include the following:
What Basic Skill areas initially met the criteria for Special Education eligibility? Is
there sufficient evidence that the skill continues to require support?
14
What other Developmental Areas of Concern initially met the criteria for Special
Education eligibility? Is there sufficient evidence that those areas continue to require
support?
Does the student continue to meet the criteria for the identified disability?
Is another disability suspected which might be causing the difficulties?
Does the student continue to require Special Education?
Are the student’s educational needs adequately identified and understood to create an
appropriate program and IEP?
Parents should also be engaged to provide additional information about the student’s home life
and potential at-home circumstances that may have shifted over the past couple of years or in
the recent past.
Question to ask parents may include:
What has changed in the family situation that may impact the student’s performance
(e.g., health issues, new jobs, loss of jobs, new house, death, new births, etc.)?
What has changed at home in terms of the student’s peer interactions?
What has the student’s emotional state been since the last evaluation (e.g., increase or
decrease in tantrums, reactions, compliance, depression, calmness, etc.)?
What has been the parent’s perception of progress in school since the last evaluation?
Have there been any outside evaluations since the last evaluation (e.g., medical,
psychological, and educational)?
Have there been any major changes in the student’s health or medical status since the
last evaluation?
Has the student joined in or participated in any sports activities, groups, or
organizations since the last evaluation? If so, what has been the student’s experiences
with these activities?
14
If the student has an IEP for a Developmental Delay, it is important for the EPT to evaluate what other
areas might be relevant for the evaluation, as this category is reserved for students aged three through
five. While school-aged administrators and practitioners may work with students who have a
Developmental Delay IEP, upon Reevaluation, the child must be eligible under another disability
category to continue receiving Special Education services.
Special Education Evaluation
Implementation Guide (August 3, 2022)
revised November10, 2022
Page 81 of 101
Has the student exhibited any changes in physical ability, coordination, or muscle
control since the last evaluation?
(AASEP, 2022)
8.3 Eligibility Determination
Eligibility Determinations for Reevaluations are virtually the same as they are for Initial
Evaluations. While there is an existing disability category to start from, the EPT will proceed
through the Three Eligibility Criteria to determine whether the student remains eligible for
Special Education services.
8.4 Planning for Services
Once the Eligibility Determination has been made, the IEP Team will review the data in the
student’s file, along with any new assessment data, to inform the development of an IEP.
Table 8-2 shows connections between the Reevaluation and the IEP process and
can be compared with Table 7-1, which presents similar information for the Initial
Evaluation Process.
Special Education Evaluation
Implementation Guide (August 3, 2022)
revised November10, 2022
Page 82 of 101
Table 8-2: Connection Between Reevaluation Process and IEP Components
IEP Component
Connections to Reevaluation Process
Present Levels of
Performance
Comparisons between prior and current assessment results, scores, and
narrative with interpretation may be included as part of this section.
Annual Goals
Review prior goals against current performance data and areas identified
for improvement in the Assessment Process to determine which goals
were met, which were not, and what appropriate goals for the student
should be put in place.
Specially Designed
Instruction and
Supplementary
Supports
Review Special Education services from the student’s prior IEP against
classroom observations, progress data, and feedback from members of the
EPT/IEP Team to evaluate whether the student was best supported.
Create a plan aligned to new present levels and goals, consider the
following:
• The Basic Skill shown to have an Adverse Effect on performance
• Impact on performance in other areas of development
• Impact of disability on Functional Skills specifically
8.5 Timelines, Consents and Documentation
As outlined in Section 8.1 above, a Reevaluation to determine a student’s continued eligibility
for Special Education and related services is required at least every three years but should not
occur more than once annually (absent extenuating circumstances). A Mandated Three-Year
Reevaluation and the accompanying IEP creation must be completed prior to the three-year
anniversary date on the previous IEP. The Reevaluation Process incudes many of the same
Parental Consent requirements as outlined in the Assessment Planning and Eligibility
Determination sections of this Guide. However, there is an exception for Reevaluations that
should be noted – Parental Consent is not needed if the LEA can demonstrate that it has taken
reasonable measures to obtain consent and the parent failed to respond. In that case, the
Reevaluation Process may proceed absent Parent Consent.
Special Education Evaluation
Implementation Guide (August 3, 2022)
revised November10, 2022
Page 83 of 101
The LEA should aim to conduct Reevaluation meetings in alignment with annual IEP review
meetings if the consolidation does not impact compliance timelines for either meeting.
8.6 Conclusion
Reevaluations, especially Mandated Three-Year Evaluations, are an essential moment in a
student’s educational career to take a step back, reassess, and determine whether the current
program and services are truly meeting the student’s needs. While some practitioners may be
tempted to forego assessments for a variety of reasons (e.g., presuming little change has
occurred with the student, large caseloads, student disinterest, etc.), it is not recommended to
skip this step. Students change a lot in three years and verifying that the student’s program is
still likely to produce an Educational Benefit can mean the difference between student success
or disengagement.
Key Questions for LEAs:
As a check for implementation/readiness, LEAs can ask themselves the following questions:
Have we set standards or timelines for when an EPT shall begin planning for a
Mandated Three-Year Reevaluation, well before the deadline arises?
Have we developed procedures for keeping parents in the loop on their
children’s education, especially if they are struggling, so we are aware of any
big changes or updates prior to conducting a Reevaluation?
Do all of our staff who participate in EPTs understand the key differences
between Initial Reviews and Reevaluations, particularly with respect to how
the Eligibility Determination proceeds with an existing IEP?
Special Education Evaluation
Implementation Guide (August 3, 2022)
revised November10, 2022
Page 84 of 101
SECTION 9: BIBLIOGRAPHY
AASEP. (2022). Review of the Major Principles of Special Education - Chapter 9.
CAST. (2022, April 2). UDL Guidelines. Retrieved from https://udlguidelines.cast.org/
Chino Valley Unified School District. (2019, October). Retrieved from Pattern of Strengths and
Weaknesses Assessment Model for Identification of Students with Specific Learning
Disabilities:
https://www.chino.k12.ca.us/cms/lib/CA01902308/Centricity/Domain/730/CVUSD%20PS
W%20Guidelines%20.pdf
Colorado Department of Education. (2017, September). Office of Special Education, ESSU Technical
Assistance. Retrieved from Cultural and/or Linguistic Diversity & Specific Learning
Disability: https://www.cde.state.co.us/cdesped/ta_sld_cld
Davies, R. (2022, April 2). Differentiated Teaching. Retrieved from A Teacher's Guide to Universal
Screening: https://www.differentiatedteaching.com/a-teachers-guide-to-universal-
screening/
Fuchs, L. S. (2015). Inclusion Versus Specialized Intervention for Very-Low-Performing
Students: What Does Access Mean in an Era of Academic Challenge? Exceptional Children
81(2), pp. 134–157.
Gearheart, C. J. (1990). Introduction to Special Education Assessment: Principles and Practices . Love
Publishing Company.
Grow Learning Center. (2022, April 1). Retrieved from News and Events:
https://www.growlearningcentre.com/news-events/developmental-milestones
Institute for Educational Sciences. (2022, March 31). What Works Clearinghouse. Retrieved from
https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/
Learning Disabilities Association of America. (n.d.). Response to Intervention. Retrieved from
LDAA Website: https://ldaamerica.org/advocacy/lda-position-papers/response-to-
intervention-rti/
Mid-Atlantic Equity Consortium, Inc. (2016). English Learners and Disproportionality in Special
Education. Retrieved from https://maec.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/English-
Learners-and-Disproportionality-in-Special-Ed.pdf
Mishkind, A. (2014). Overview: State definitions of college and career readiness. . Washington, DC:
College & Career Readiness & Success Center at American Institutes for Research.
National Center for Education Evaluation. (2003, December). National Center for Education
Evaluation. Retrieved from Identifying and Implementing Educational Practices
Special Education Evaluation
Implementation Guide (August 3, 2022)
revised November10, 2022
Page 85 of 101
Supported By Rigorous Evidence: A User Friendly Guide:
https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/pubs/evidence_based/evidence_based.asp
National Center for Learning Disabilities. (2020, October). Significant Disproportionality in Special
Education: Current Trends and Actions for Impact. Retrieved from
https://www.ncld.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/2020-NCLD-
Disproportionality_Trends-and-Actions-for-Impact_FINAL-1.pdf
National Center on Improving Literacy. (2019). Retrieved from Best practices in universal
screening.: https://improvingliteracy.org/brief/best-practices-universal-screening
Stewart, L. H. (2008). Best practices in developing academic local norms. In I. A. (Eds.), Best
practices in school psychology V (pp. 225-242). Bethesda: National Association of School
Psychologists.
Sweetwater Union High School District. (n.d.). Education for All, Special Services. Retrieved from
Sweetwater Union High School District Website:
http://specialservices.sweetwaterschools.org/5-iep-assessment/
Special Education Evaluation
Implementation Guide (August 3, 2022)
revised November10, 2022
Page 86 of 101
SECTION 10: APPENDICES
Appendix A
Glossary
Adverse Effect
Adverse Effect means to have a negative impact on the Basic Skills areas. The impact does not
need to be substantial, significant, or marked. It is more than a minor or transient hindrance,
evidenced by findings and observations based on data sources and objective assessments with
replicable results.
Basic Skills
Basic Skills are the skills necessary for a student’s academic performance including a focus on
communication, intellectual or cognitive capacities, and learning styles.
Child Find
Child Find is a component of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act
(IDEA) 2004 that requires States and LEAs to identify, locate, and evaluate all students with
disabilities residing in the State, regardless of the severity of their disabilities, and who need
Special Education and related services.
Developmental Areas of Concern
Developmental Areas of Concern are broader areas of development (than the Basic Skill areas)
that may be impacted by the presence of a disability.
Educational Benefit
Educational Benefit refers to the responsibility that LEAs must ensure that certain standards of
IEP creation and service planning are upheld to maximize the benefits for the student and
optimize the student’s potential.
Educational Planning Team (EPT)
A team of experts including parents, teachers, special educators, psychologists, and therapists
that is responsible for developing an evaluation plan and reviewing the results to determine if a
student is or continues to be eligible for special education and related services.
Special Education Evaluation
Implementation Guide (August 3, 2022)
revised November10, 2022
Page 87 of 101
Educational Support Team (EST)
An Educational Support Team is a collaborative team that has regularly scheduled meetings
with shared agendas, identified roles for participants, and uses data to determine the additional
supports a child may need to be successful.
Ideally, the EST includes an administrator, teachers, a school psychologist, special educator,
school counselor(s), parents/families, a social worker, other staff with behavioral and/or
academic expertise, and students when appropriate.
This team implements a student plan that supports a classroom teacher’s instruction with
supplemental, short-term, skill-specific interventions for a student. Plans are frequently
monitored to assess progress and adjust.
Educational Performance
Educational Performance is a combination of the academic and functional behavioral skills
necessary for a student to successfully perform within the general education classroom at a
level equivalent to their grade-level peers.
Eligibility Criteria
To be eligible for Special Education services as a school-aged child, these three criteria must be
met by the student and documented. The Eligibility Criteria include ensuring that a student
meets the criteria for one of the 13 disability categories, the disability causes an Adverse Effect
(except SLD and Deaf-Blindness), and the student requires Special Education to make progress
in school. This was formerly referred to as “the three gates.”
Evaluation Process
The Evaluation Process for Special Education is a model that outlines the discrete planning and
implementation stages that help EPTs determine if a student is eligible for Special Education
and related services.
Free and Appropriate Public Education
FAPE is defined as Special Education and related services that are provided for free by the LEA,
that meet State standards, are aligned to appropriate education in the State involved, and are
provided in conformity with an Individualized Education Program (IEP).
Special Education Evaluation
Implementation Guide (August 3, 2022)
revised November10, 2022
Page 88 of 101
Functional Skills
Functional Skills is defined as “the acquisition of essential and critical skills needed for a
student with disabilities to learn specific daily living, personal, social, and employment skills or
the skills needed to increase performance and independence at work, in school, in the home, in
the community, for leisure time, and for post-secondary and other lifelong opportunities.”
Independent Educational Evaluations (IEE)
Independent Educational Evaluation means an evaluation conducted by a qualified examiner
who is not employed by the public agency responsible for the education of the student in
question.
Individualized Education Program (IEP)
An IEP is a legal document provided for each student with a disability who is eligible for
Special Education that sets forth the student’s present levels of performance, annual goals, and
a set of services or supports that enable the student to advance toward attaining those goals.
Initial Evaluation Process
The Initial Evaluation Process is the process required by IDEA that an LEA must take for a
student before any Special Education and related services can be provided to that student and
its purpose is to determine eligibility for Special Education services.
Initial Referral
The Initial Referral is the first stage of the Initial Evaluation Process and begins with a Request
for Evaluation for a student who does not already have an IEP.
Local Educational Agency (LEA)
An LEA is the public authority legally constituted to run public elementary or secondary
schools in a city, county, township, or school district (e.g., District or Supervisory Union).
Mandated Three Year Evaluation
Under IDEA, a student who has an IEP and who qualified for Special Education services in the
past must be reevaluated at least every three years. This is sometimes also referred to as a
triennial review or Reevaluation.
Special Education Evaluation
Implementation Guide (August 3, 2022)
revised November10, 2022
Page 89 of 101
Parental Consent
Parental Consent means that the parent understands and agrees in writing to the carrying out of
the activity for which consent is sought (e.g., an evaluation for Special Education, assessments,
etc.). This can only be done after the parent has been fully informed of all information relevant
to the activity (via an Evaluation Plan, Procedural Safeguards and Prior Written Notice), in the
parent’s preferred language or the LEA must provide a translator to ensure the parent
understands what is being asked.
Patterns of Strengths and Weaknesses (PSW)
PSW is a framework for examining a student’s areas of strength, as well as weaknesses or
deficits, often used by educators to determine eligibility for Special Education services
(especially when the Suspected Disability is SLD).
Procedural Safeguards
Procedural Safeguards protect the rights of students with disabilities and their parents. These
safeguards include topics such as the right to participate in all meetings, to examine all
educational records, and to obtain an IEE and should be given to parents in written form at least
once per year.
Promising Practice
A wide range of practices that include educator activities, policies, systems, procedures, and
practices aimed to achieve positive changes in student attitudes and academic and non-
academic behaviors.
Reevaluation
A Reevaluation is the process of engaging in the Evaluation Process for a student who already
has an IEP. This is frequently completed every three years but may occur at other times if
appropriate.
Response to Intervention (RTI)
Response to intervention (RTI) is a proactive approach that involves closely monitoring student
progress to measures students’ skills and uses this data to decide which interventions to use. It
aims to identify struggling students early on and give them the support they need. RTI isn’t a
specific program or type of teaching.
Special Education Evaluation
Implementation Guide (August 3, 2022)
revised November10, 2022
Page 90 of 101
Request for Evaluation
A Request for Evaluation is a verbal or written request made to an LEA that begins the
Evaluation Process for Special Education. The Request for Evaluation can be made by a parent,
as well as school administrators, teachers, LEA, or other key community partners (e.g., agency
staff, external providers) on behalf of a student who is suspected of having a disability requiring
Special Education.
Section 504
Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 is a civil rights law that applies to all individuals
with disabilities. Section 504 protects any individual with disabilities from discriminatory
practices including equitable access to participate in public programs and services – including
school.
Section 504 Plan
A Section 504 Plan is a document that outlines the accommodations a student with a disability
will receive to help access the general education curriculum.
Special Education
Special Education means Specially Designed Instruction, provided at no cost to the parents, to
meet the unique needs of a child with a disability, including instruction conducted in the
classroom, in the home, in hospitals and institutions and in other settings, as well as instruction
in physical education.
Specific Learning Disability (SLD)
SLD is one of the 13 disability classifications in IDEA and is a disability that interferes with a
student's ability to listen, think, speak, write, spell, or do mathematical calculations. Specific
Learning Disability includes conditions such as perceptual disabilities, brain injury, minimal
brain dysfunction, dyslexia, and developmental aphasia. SLD does not include a learning
problem that is primarily the result of: visual, hearing, or other motor disabilities; intellectual
disability; emotional disturbance; or environmental, cultural, or economic disadvantage.
Suspected Disability
A Suspected Disability occurs when a student exhibits behaviors or learning patterns that are
frequently connected to a particular disability for which Special Education services are needed
to make progress in the general education curriculum.
Special Education Evaluation
Implementation Guide (August 3, 2022)
revised November10, 2022
Page 91 of 101
Universal Screeners
Universal Screeners are used by educators to monitor the progress of all students and can help
educators identify students who might be at risk for learning challenges.
VTmtss Framework
The VTmtss Framework articulates the components and principles of an effective school system
that are necessary to provide each and every student with the academic, behavioral, and social
emotional supports and services they need to succeed.
The innovation neutral systems-level approach of this framework provides the infrastructure
for content or practice specific multi-tiered systems of support models, such as PBIS or RTI to be
equitable and sustainable.
The VTmtss Framework it not tiered.
Early MTSS
Early MTSS aims to improve early learning, social and emotional well-being, and competence
for children from birth through age 8.
Vermont Early MTSS focuses on building capacity at the systems and practice level-- a two
prong approach and is innovation neutral.
Early MTSS balances building a system of supports for school-based programs, families, health
providers, and community partners with supporting evidence-based inclusion practices in the
classroom to fidelity.
Special Education Evaluation
Implementation Guide (August 3, 2022)
revised November10, 2022
Page 92 of 101
Appendix B
Signs of Suspected Disability
Early Childhood (5-7 years old)
• Delayed speech
• Trouble learning numbers, the alphabet, colors, shapes, etc.
• Has problems responding when being called from across the room, even when it involves
something interesting
• Doesn't play games involving back and forth play
• Doesn't point or shows things to others
• Doesn't understand simple instructions
• Doesn't play pretend or make-believe
• Doesn't make eye contact
• Doesn't respond to people outside the family
• Shows extreme behavior (unusually fearful, aggressive, shy, or sad)
• Is unusually withdrawn and not active
• Is easily distracted, has trouble focusing on one activity for more than 5 min.
• Can't jump in place
• Has trouble scribbling
• Resists dressing, sleeping, using toilet
• Loses skills he or she once had
• Can't brush teeth, wash, and dry hands, or get undressed without help
Middle-Aged Children (8-12 years old)
• Poor concentration or sustaining attentions
• Difficulty following directions
• Difficulty organizing tasks or activities
• Poor memorization
• Hard time getting started with tasks
• Hyperactivity/ impulsivity
• Strange or repetitive language patterns
• Difficulty with oral language (production)
• Hard time understanding language
• Poor social skills or inability to relate to others
• Hard time making friends
• Poor spelling
Special Education Evaluation
Implementation Guide (August 3, 2022)
revised November10, 2022
Page 93 of 101
• Slow, inaccurate reading skills
• Difficulty with pronunciation
Teenagers (13 years and older)
• Slow to learn new skills
• Poor concentration or sustained attention
• Unable to master tasks
• Slow to progress or make progress
• Trouble reading
• Impulsivity/Hyperactivity
• Hard time with problem solving or logical thinking
• Poor memorization
• Aggression
• Withdrawal
• Excessive anxiety
• Self-injurious behavior
Special Education Evaluation
Implementation Guide (August 3, 2022)
revised November10, 2022
Page 94 of 101
Appendix C
Disability Characteristics Checklist
Use this chart to identify whether a student has a disability under one of the categories outlined by IDEA.
Autism Spectrum Disorder
Significantly affects verbal and non-verbal communication and social interaction
Generally evident before age three
Engagement in repetitive activities and stereotyped movements
Resistance to environmental change or change in daily routines
Unusual responses to sensory experiences
May be diagnosed as autism, pervasive developmental disorder – not otherwise
specified, Rett’s Disorder, Asperger’s Disorder, childhood disintegrative disorder
Characteristics vary from mild to severe and in the number of symptoms present
Usually needs an opinion of a licensed psychologist or doctor with expertise as to the
existence of this disability
Deaf-Blindness
Concomitant hearing and visual impairments, which when combined causes severe
communication, developmental and educational needs that they cannot be
accommodated in Special Education programs solely for children with deafness or
children with blindness
Emotional Disturbance
Exhibits one or more of the following characteristics over a long period of time and to a
marked degree
Inability to learn that cannot be explained by intellectual, sensory, or health factors
Inability to build or maintain satisfactory interpersonal relationships with peers and
teachers
Inappropriate types of behaviors or feelings under normal circumstances
General pervasive mood of unhappiness or depression
Tendency to develop physical symptoms or fears associated with personal or school
problems
Special Education Evaluation
Implementation Guide (August 3, 2022)
revised November10, 2022
Page 95 of 101
Usually needs an opinion of a licensed psychologist or psychiatrist as to the existence of
this disability
15
Hearing Loss
Deafness or hard of hearing in one or both ears, with or without amplification
Demonstrated by a 25 decibel HL threshold (ANSI, 69) or worse for one or more of the
frequencies 250-8000HZ
Determined by an audiologist, otologist, or otolaryngologist
15
Upon determination of the existence of an emotional disturbance, the LEA must inform the
parent of the availability of interagency coordination of services.
Note about Social Maladjustment: A student who is socially maladjusted without one or
more of the criteria listed above should not be considered to have an emotional disturbance.
Social maladjustment is a persistent pattern of violating social norms and is marked by
struggle with authority, low frustration threshold, impulsivity, or manipulative behaviors.
To qualify for the emotional disturbance disability category for Special Education, children
with social maladjustment often have some of the following:
Unhappiness or depression that is not pervasive;
Problem behaviors that are goal-directed, self-serving, and manipulative;
Actions that are based on perceived self-interest even though others may consider
the behavior to be self-defeating;
General social conventions and behavioral standards are understood but not
accepted;
Negative counter-cultural standards or peers are accepted and followed;
Problem behaviors have escalated during pre-adolescence or adolescence;
Inappropriate behaviors are displayed in selected settings or situations (e.g., only at
home, in school, or in selected classes), while other behavior is appropriately
controlled; and/or
Problem behaviors are frequently the result of encouragement by a peer group, are
intentional, and the student understands the consequences of such behaviors.
Special Education Evaluation
Implementation Guide (August 3, 2022)
revised November10, 2022
Page 96 of 101
Intellectual Disability
Delay in learning of sufficient magnitude to cause a student’s performance to fall at or
below -1.5 standard deviations from the mean of a test of intellectual ability, existing
concurrently with deficits in adaptive behavior
Multiple Disabilities
Concomitant impairments (such as intellectual disability-blindness or intellectual
disability-orthopedic impairment) the combination of which causes such severe
educational needs that they cannot be accommodated in Special Education programs
solely for one of the impairments
Does not include deaf-blindness
Orthopedic Impairment
Includes impairments caused by a congenital anomaly, disease (e.g., poliomyelitis, bone
tuberculosis), or other causes (e.g., cerebral palsy, amputation, fractures or burns that
cause contractures)
Determined by a licensed physician
Other Health Impairment
Limited strength, vitality, or alertness, including a heightened alertness to environmental
stimuli, that results in limited alertness in the educational environment
Due to chronic or acute health problems such as asthma, attention deficit disorder or
attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, diabetes, epilepsy, a heart condition, hemophilia,
lead poisoning, leukemia, nephritis, rheumatic fever, sickle cell anemia, non-verbal
learning disability, Tourette syndrome
Determined by a person whose professional licensure authorizes the offering of an
opinion on the existence of the specific condition and who has specific training and
experience in diagnosing and recommending treatment for the specific condition
suspected
Specific Learning Disability
Disorder in one or more of the basic psychological processes involved in understanding
or in using language, spoken, or written
May manifest itself in the imperfect ability to listen, think, speak, read, write, spell, or do
mathematical calculations
Special Education Evaluation
Implementation Guide (August 3, 2022)
revised November10, 2022
Page 97 of 101
Includes conditions such as perceptual disabilities, brain injury, minimal brain
dysfunction, dyslexia, and developmental aphasia
Does not include a learning problem that is primarily the result of visual, hearing, or
motor disabilities, intellectual disability, emotional disturbance, or environmental,
cultural, or economic disadvantage
Speech and Language Impairment
Communication disorder, such as stuttering, impaired articulation, a language
impairment, or a voice impairment, that adversely effects a student’s educational
performance
Demonstrated by significant deficits in listening comprehension or oral expression
Determined by a licensed speech-language pathologist
Special Education Evaluation
Implementation Guide (August 3, 2022)
revised November10, 2022
Page 98 of 101
A note about determining speech and language impairment: VT regulations set forth
additional specific criteria for identifying SLI:
Listening Comprehension - At least 2.0 standard deviations below the mean on at least one
composite score and other measures of auditory processing or comprehension of connected
speech, including:
• Phonology
• Morphology
• Syntax
• Semantics
• Pragmatics
Oral Expression - Child demonstrates one or more of the following conditions
:
• A significant deficit in voice when (a) an otolaryngologist has documented that
treatment is indicated for a vocal pathology or speech related medical condition; and
(b) abnormal vocal characteristics in pitch, quality, nasality, volume, or beath
support for more than one month.
• A significant deficit in fluency when (a) part word repetitions or sound prolongations
occur on at least 5% of the words spoken in two or more speech samples; (b) sound
or silent prolongations exceed one second in two or more speech samples; or (c)
secondary symptoms or signs of tension or struggle during speech which are so
severe as to interfere with the flow of communication.
• A significant deficit in articulation attributed to an organic or functional disorder
when (a) the student is unable to articulate two or more of the unrelated phonemes
in connected speech (see Chart in Vt. Rule 2362.2(j) for phonemes); and (b) it is not
attributed to dialect or second language difficulties.
• A significant deficit in oral discourse exists when a student demonstrates a deficit of
at least 2.0 standard deviations below the mean on at least one composite score and
other measures of oral discourse, including:
o Phonology
o Morphology
o Syntax
o Semantics
o Pragmatics
Special Education Evaluation
Implementation Guide (August 3, 2022)
revised November10, 2022
Page 99 of 101
Traumatic Brain Injury
Injury to the brain caused by an external physical force or by an internal occurrence such
as a stroke or aneurysm, resulting in total or partial functional disability or psychosocial
impairment, or both
Includes open or closed head injuries resulting in impairments in on or more areas
including:
• Cognition
• Language
• Memory
• Attention
• Reasoning
• Abstract thinking
• Judgment
• Problem solving
• Sensory, perceptual, and motor abilities
• Psychosocial behavior
• Physical functions
• Information processing
• Speech
Does not include brain injuries that are congenital or degenerative, or brain injuries
induced by birth trauma
Determined by a licensed physician
Visual Impairment
An impairment in vision, including:
• Blindness and partial sight
• A visual acuity of 20/70 or less in the better eye
• Reduced visual field to 20 degrees
• A diagnosis of cortical visual impairment
• A diagnosis of a degenerative condition that is likely to result in a significant loss
of vision
• Other vision condition such as convergence insufficiency disorder
Determined by an optometrist or ophthalmologist
Special Education Evaluation
Implementation Guide (August 3, 2022)
revised November10, 2022
Page 100 of 101
Appendix D
The following table presents hyperlinks to all AOE resources referenced throughout the Guide, organized
by section.
Guide Section Supporting Forms or Resources
Big Picture Vermont Special Education Procedures Manual
System of supports VTmtss Field Guide
Universal Screening Assessments
Educational Support Teams resource page
Vermont Family Engagement Toolkit and Self-Assessment
Initial Referral Form 1: Notice of Meeting
Form 2: Special Education Evaluation Plan and Report
Form 3: Prior Written Notice of Special Education Evaluation
Form 3a: Consent for a Special Education Evaluation
Form 7: Notice of Local Educational Agency Decision
Notice of Procedural Safeguards
Assessment Process Vermont Family Engagement Toolkit and Self-Assessment
Form 2: Special Education Evaluation Plan and Report
Guidance to Rule Change: Functional Skills and Performance
Form 3: Notice of Special Education Evaluation
Form 3a: Consent for a Special Education Evaluation
Form 4: Notice of Initial Evaluation Delay
Form 7: Notice of Local Educational Agency Decision
Notice of Procedural Safeguards
Special Education Evaluation
Implementation Guide (August 3, 2022)
revised November10, 2022
Page 101 of 101
Guide Section Supporting Forms or Resources
Eligibility Determination Adverse Effect Memorandum
Three-Gate Eligibility Determination Guidance Document
Specific Learning Disability: Guidelines for Determining
Eligibility
Systematic Observation of Learner – Core Instruction
Specially Designed Instruction Handout
Specially Designed Instruction Handout Part II
Determination of Eligibility: Specific Learning Disability
Form 2: Special Education Evaluation Plan and Report
Notice of Procedural Safeguards
Reevaluation Form 8: Written Agreement Between Parents and District Re-
evaluations
Professional
Development Request
form
AOE Professional Development Request Form
