DeKalb County School District
IEP Blueprint: Foundations Compliance Training
You are currently serving as the teacher of record for students with disabilities. This program is designed to give you the legal knowledge and practical skills to write IEPs that are compliant, defensible, and actually useful to the students you serve. Every module is grounded directly in the DCSD Policies, Procedures & Practices Handbook and IDEA (2004).
Segment A
Recently Promoted Paraprofessionals
You have worked in special education settings. You may have attended IEP meetings. You have not yet authored, facilitated, or been legally accountable for an IEP.
Segment B
Career-Changers & Professionals New to Education
You come from outside education — business, government, or another field. You have no prior exposure to IDEA, IEPs, or special education law. You start here with no assumed background.
How This Training Is Structured
There are 6 modules, each designed to fit a one-hour session. Work through them in order — each module builds on the last. At the end of each module, you will find a knowledge check and a link to the IEP Blueprint scenario simulation to practice what you learned.
What You Will Be Able to Do After This Training
1
Identify the legal requirements
Distinguish what IDEA requires from what Georgia DOE adds on top, and understand what compliance failure actually costs a student.
2
Construct every IEP section correctly
Write a PLAAFP that is specific and data-driven, goals that are measurable and anchored to the PLAAFP, and a services grid that is legally defensible.
3
Identify and fix compliance problems
Use the IEP compliance checklist to audit your own work before submitting, and recognize the documented failure patterns that generate out-of-compliance alerts in DCSD.
4
Apply Georgia DOE procedures correctly
Sequence timelines accurately, document in Infinite Campus as required, and distinguish state-specific requirements from federal IDEA mandates.
Your Six Modules
Module 1 of 6
The Legal Foundation — IDEA, FAPE & Why Compliance Matters
Before you can write a compliant IEP, you need to understand what the law requires and why it exists. This module builds the conceptual foundation everything else depends on.
Why Special Education Has a Legal Framework
Before 1975, students with disabilities were routinely excluded from public schools or placed in segregated programs without individualized planning, parental input, or accountability for outcomes. Congress enacted the Education for All Handicapped Children Act in 1975 — reauthorized as the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) — to guarantee that every eligible student with a disability receives a Free Appropriate Public Education (FAPE).
IDEA is federal law. Every IEP you write is a legal document. Every service you list is a legal commitment. Every timeline you miss is a potential federal violation. That is not meant to alarm you — it is meant to give you an accurate understanding of why the procedures exist and why compliance matters beyond paperwork.
DCSD Handbook — Direct Quote
"Failure to follow procedures for writing an IEP or failure to implement all parts of the IEP as written could result in a violation of FAPE. Violations of FAPE not only do a disservice to the student, but they can also result in the District having to expend its limited human and physical resources to provide additional services or supports, reimburse parents, or pay other fees."
IDEA's Six Guiding Principles
IDEA is organized around six principles that govern how eligible students with disabilities are served. All six shape what goes into an IEP.
Every eligible student with a disability must receive special education and related services at no cost to the family. FAPE is individualized — it is based on the student's specific needs, not what is most convenient or cost-effective for the district. The IEP is the written plan for providing FAPE.
Students with disabilities must be educated with non-disabled peers to the maximum extent appropriate. Removal from general education is only justified when the nature or severity of the disability is such that education in general education settings — even with supplementary aids and services — cannot be achieved satisfactorily. LRE is not a single setting; it is a decision that must be justified individually for each student.
Students must be evaluated using procedures that are non-discriminatory, multi-faceted, and conducted by a team of qualified professionals. Evaluations must rule out three exclusionary factors before a disability can be identified: lack of appropriate instruction in reading or math, and limited English proficiency. Evaluations are required before initial placement and at least every three years (triennial reevaluation).
Every eligible student must have a written IEP developed by a team that includes the parent, the student (as appropriate), general and special education teachers, a district representative, and an evaluation interpreter. The IEP must be reviewed at least annually and implemented immediately. This training program focuses on this principle.
Parents are equal partners in the IEP process. They have the right to participate in all meetings regarding their child's identification, evaluation, and placement; to receive written notice before any changes; to review all educational records; and to dispute decisions through mediation or due process. Failing to meaningfully involve parents is one of the most common and serious procedural violations.
IDEA guarantees a set of procedural rights to parents and students designed to ensure the fairness and accountability of the special education process. These include Prior Written Notice (PWN) before any proposed change, the right to an Independent Educational Evaluation (IEE), mediation, and due process hearings. You are required to provide parents with a copy of the Procedural Safeguards Notice at least once per year.
The Three IEP Requirements: Procedural, Substantive, Implementation
The DCSD handbook breaks IEP compliance into three distinct categories. All three must be met for a student to be receiving FAPE.
| Requirement Type | What It Means | What Failure Looks Like |
|---|---|---|
| Procedural | The IEP process — the how and when — was followed correctly. All required team members participated. All required sections are present and complete. Timelines were met. | Missing a required team member, holding a meeting without proper notice, submitting an IEP after the deadline. |
| Substantive | The content of the IEP is sufficient to enable the student to make meaningful progress. Goals are ambitious and measurable. Services address identified needs. | Goals that are vague or copied year-to-year. PLAAFP needs that don't generate goals. Services that don't match student need. |
| Implementation | The services and supports listed in the IEP are actually provided as written — the right service, in the right setting, for the right amount of time, by the right provider. | Failing to provide a testing accommodation. Delivering services in a different room than documented. Not implementing a Behavior Intervention Plan. |
Critical Point — Documented in DCSD
The most commonly missed requirement in DCSD is implementation. The Walker (2019) investigation found that students were being denied IEP accommodations during standardized testing and that required parent communication timelines were being ignored. Both are implementation failures. Having a correct IEP on paper is not sufficient — the IEP must be carried out as written.
The Endrew F. Standard (2017)
In 2017, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a unanimous ruling in Endrew F. v. Douglas County School District that raised the standard for what an IEP must accomplish. Before this ruling, courts had accepted IEPs that provided any educational benefit, even minimal progress. Endrew F. changed that.
"To meet its substantive obligation under the IDEA, a school must offer an IEP reasonably calculated to enable a child to make progress appropriate in light of the child's circumstances."
Endrew F. v. Douglas County School District, 2017, p. 15
What this means practically: IEP goals must be ambitious and challenging, not just technically present. A goal that is the same year after year, or one that expects a student reading five years below grade level to reach grade level in twelve months, fails the Endrew F. standard for different reasons — the first is too unambitious, the second is unrealistic. The IEP team must use current data and collective expertise to find the right balance.
Key Takeaway
The IEP does not guarantee that a student will achieve every goal. It does guarantee that the district will make its best, data-informed effort to enable appropriate progress. The difference matters legally: you are not promising outcomes, but you are making a binding commitment to provide services.
Federal vs. Georgia DOE: The Two Layers of Compliance
Every IEP in DCSD must comply with two overlapping sets of requirements. Understanding the difference is essential because a procedure that satisfies federal IDEA may not satisfy Georgia's additional requirements.
Federal Floor — IDEA (2004)
Sets minimum requirements all states must meet. Examples: 30-day timeline from eligibility to initial IEP, annual IEP review, required IEP team composition, six required IEP components.
Georgia DOE — State Additions
Georgia adds requirements on top of the federal floor. Examples: 70-day best practice window from consent to IEP completion, Infinite Campus documentation protocols, specific consent form sequences, DCSD IEP Compliance Checklist use.
DCSD-Specific — Know This
Georgia uses calendar days (not school days) for the 60-day evaluation timeline. The DCSD best practice is 70 total calendar days from receipt of signed consent: evaluation reports completed by day 60, eligibility and IEP completed by day 70. These timelines apply to your students right now.
Knowledge Check — Module 1
A student's IEP has all required sections completed and was developed on time. Six weeks into the school year, his teacher is providing reading services in the hallway instead of the resource room documented in the IEP. Has FAPE been violated?
✓ Correct. FAPE requires all three requirements be met: procedural, substantive, and implementation. A procedurally complete IEP does not satisfy FAPE if it is not implemented as written. The setting, frequency, duration, and provider are all implementation elements. Changing any of them without amending the IEP is a violation.
Reference: DCSD Handbook Ch. 5 — Implementation Requirements; Ch. 10 — Amending the IEP
✗ Incorrect. The setting documented in the IEP is a legal commitment. Delivering services in a different location — even if the services themselves are good — is an implementation violation of FAPE. The IEP must be amended if the setting changes.
Reference: DCSD Handbook Ch. 5 — Common Implementation Errors
Module 2 of 6
The IEP Team & Meeting Procedures
Who must be in the room, what must happen before, during, and after the meeting, and what documentation DCSD requires — including procedures specific to the initial IEP.
Required IEP Team Members
IDEA specifies exactly who must be on the IEP team. An IEP developed without all required members is procedurally deficient — it was developed without the expertise and representation that the law requires. The following members are not optional.
Parents are equal participants, not guests. They have the right to participate in all decisions. If a parent cannot attend, the district must make multiple documented attempts to schedule the meeting at a mutually agreeable time. A meeting held without the parent when the parent wanted to attend is a procedural violation. If the parent cannot be reached after documented attempts, the meeting may proceed — but the IEP must be sent to the parent afterward.
Required if the student is or may be participating in the general education environment. Even if the student receives most instruction in a special education setting, a general education teacher must be present. A dually certified teacher cannot serve both the general and special education teacher roles simultaneously — both roles require a distinct team member relative to the child.
The special education teacher who works with the student, or the provider who delivers the student's special education services. This is typically the case manager. As a promoted paraprofessional or new special education teacher, this is your role in the meeting.
A district representative who is qualified to supervise specially designed instruction, knowledgeable about the general curriculum, and authorized to commit district resources. This person must have genuine authority — not just knowledge. If the LEA rep cannot commit to a service, the IEP cannot be finalized at that meeting.
Someone who can explain what the evaluation data means for instruction. This is often the school psychologist or a teacher who understands the assessment results. The same person may fill another role (e.g., the special education teacher may also serve as the evaluation interpreter).
Required whenever transition services are being discussed (beginning no later than age 16 in Georgia). Strongly encouraged at all ages. Student participation increases the likelihood accommodations will be used consistently.
Required for students dually identified as having a disability and being an English Learner. The ESOL teacher must provide input on language needs as they relate to the IEP. Special education does not replace ESOL services — both must be provided.
Initial IEP: DCSD's 70-Day Timeline
The initial IEP is the first IEP developed after a student is found eligible. DCSD has a specific best practice timeline that begins from the date the parent signs consent for evaluation.
▶
Day 0 — Parent Signs Consent for Evaluation
The clock starts. Georgia uses calendar days, not school days.
60
Day 60 — All Evaluation Reports Completed
Comprehensive evaluation including psychological report, all assessments, and evaluation summary. Reports must be completed before the eligibility meeting can be held.
70
Day 70 — Eligibility Decision and Initial IEP Completed
DCSD best practice: eligibility and initial IEP should both be completed by day 70. IDEA's requirement is that the IEP meeting be held within 30 calendar days of the eligibility determination.
!
Immediately After IEP — Services Begin
As soon as possible following development of the IEP, special education and related services must be made available. Best practice is to schedule the initial IEP meeting immediately after the eligibility determination — at the end of the eligibility meeting if possible.
Before, During, and After the Meeting: What DCSD Requires
Critical Concept — Predetermination
School personnel may come to the meeting with suggestions and recommendations. They may not make final decisions before the meeting. This distinction is called predetermination, and it is one of the most serious procedural IEP errors. Placement, goals, and services cannot be decided before the parent participates. Sending the parent a completed IEP to "review and sign" — rather than developing it together — is a violation of parental rights.
After the Initial IEP Meeting — DCSD IC Upload Sequence
All documents must be uploaded to Infinite Campus within 10 calendar days of the meeting:
- ASSOCIATE to the Plan folder: Prior Written Notice, Consent for Services, complete signed IEP, Excusal Notices, Parent Notification
- STAPLE to the Comprehensive Evaluation header: Eligibility header, signed Eligibility Report, Evaluation Summary, all evaluations, signed Prior Written Notice Parental Consent for Evaluation
- Baseline data: The case manager must take baseline data on all new goals and short-term objectives within 10 days of services beginning. This is required, not optional.
Knowledge Check — Module 2
A parent signed evaluation consent on September 1. It is now October 20 — 49 calendar days later. The school psychologist tells you the evaluation reports will be ready in two weeks (around November 3, day 63). Is the district on track?
✓ Correct. The 60-day window is for completing the evaluation — day 60 from September 1 is October 31. November 3 is day 63, which is three days past the required completion date. The 30-day IEP timeline is a separate clock that doesn't start until eligibility is determined, so being late on evaluations pushes everything back and creates a compliance violation.
Reference: DCSD Handbook Ch. 7 — DCSD Best Practice 70-day timeline; IDEA 34 C.F.R. §300.301
✗ Incorrect. The evaluation timeline and the IEP timeline are separate. The evaluation must be completed within 60 calendar days of consent. That deadline is October 31. November 3 is day 63 — a violation of the evaluation timeline regardless of when the IEP is scheduled.
Reference: DCSD Handbook Ch. 7 — DCSD Best Practice 70-day timeline
Module 3 of 6
Present Levels of Academic Achievement & Functional Performance (PLAAFP)
The PLAAFP is the foundation of the entire IEP. Everything that follows — goals, services, accommodations, placement — must trace back to what is documented here.
What the PLAAFP Must Accomplish
The PLAAFP is not a summary of a student's disability. It is a precise, data-driven description of where the student is right now academically and functionally, written clearly enough that a stranger — someone who has never met the student — can read it and understand exactly what the student does and does not do.
DCSD Completeness Standard
Your PLAAFP is complete when it:
- Describes both academic achievement and functional performance
- Describes strengths specifically enough to develop strategies
- Describes disability-related needs in an observable and measurable way
- Describes parent concerns
- Describes how the disability affects involvement and progress in general education
- Documents consideration of Special Factors
- A stranger can read it and understand what the student is doing.
The Six Required PLAAFP Components
1
Results of the Initial or Most Recent Evaluation
A brief, relevant summary of evaluation data — not a listing of scores. Include what the data tells you about the student's current performance and future needs. Update achievement data annually; do not carry forward stale data. Use current grades, benchmark scores, and statewide assessment results where available.
2
Academic, Developmental, and Functional Strengths
Specific enough to use in developing strategies. "Mary has a strength in reading" is noncompliant. "Rick successfully participates in 4th grade math without special education support and benefits from an assignment notebook and peer assistance for written work" is compliant. Strengths must be updated if they change year to year.
3
Academic, Developmental, and Functional Needs
The most critical section. Every need documented here must generate at least one annual goal — or there must be a documented explanation for why no goal is being written. Needs must be specific, measurable, and cite sources. "Seth's weakest areas are math and written comprehension" is noncompliant. "Rick reads 55 wpm at grade 2 level; grade 4 peers average 120–150 wpm" is compliant.
4
Parental Concerns
Must be documented even when parents don't attend the meeting — draw from communication that has occurred over the year. Document what parents said, not a vague paraphrase. "Seth's mother is happy with her program" is noncompliant. The team is obligated to consider parent concerns; it is not obligated to provide every service a parent requests.
5
Impact of the Disability on Involvement in General Education
Explain specifically how this student's disability affects classroom participation and progress. Do not simply name the eligibility category. "Seth's learning disability hinders progress" is noncompliant. "Due to Michael's deficits in decoding, he cannot comprehend grade-level materials when reading independently" is compliant. Do not include services in this section.
6
Consideration of Special Factors
Six special factors must be considered for every student: behavior, limited English proficiency, visual impairment, communication needs, assistive technology, and alternative format materials. Answer Yes or No to each. If the answer is Yes, a description must be provided — and the IEP must address the need.
The Non-Negotiable Linkage Rule
"There is never an identified need/deficit without a goal, and there is never a goal without an identified need/deficit — UNLESS there is a statement that explains the missing goal."
DCSD Policies, Procedures & Practices Handbook, Chapter 5
This is the chain that connects the IEP: every need documented in the PLAAFP must have a corresponding goal, and every goal must trace back to a documented need. If you write a goal that has no corresponding PLAAFP need, the IEP is noncompliant. If you document a need but write no goal, the IEP is noncompliant — unless you document a specific explanation for why no goal is being written.
Knowledge Check — Module 3
A teacher writes this in the PLAAFP needs section: "Keisha's math skills are below grade level and she needs support to progress in the general curriculum." Is this compliant?
✓ Correct. "Below grade level" and "needs support" are not specific, observable, or measurable. A compliant needs statement would include: the specific skill deficit (e.g., multi-digit multiplication, place value), current performance data (e.g., "scores 42% accuracy on 4th grade multiplication probes"), a comparison to grade-level expectations, and the source of the data. Without this specificity, the goal that follows cannot be adequately grounded in evidence.
Reference: DCSD Handbook Ch. 5 — Description of Academic, Developmental and/or Functional Needs; Best Practice vs. Noncompliant examples
✗ Incorrect. Vague needs statements are explicitly identified as noncompliant in the DCSD handbook. Linking to "the general curriculum" without specific data does not satisfy the requirement for observable, measurable needs. The goal that follows cannot be adequately grounded, and the IEP team cannot determine whether the student is making appropriate progress.
Reference: DCSD Handbook Ch. 5 — Description of Academic, Developmental and/or Functional Needs
Module 4 of 6
Measurable Annual Goals & Progress Monitoring
A goal that cannot be measured cannot determine whether a student received FAPE. This module teaches you to write goals that are genuinely measurable — and to use data to make instructional decisions.
The Four Required Goal Elements
Every IEP goal must contain four elements. A goal missing any one of these elements is noncompliant. DCSD calls this the SMART goal framework — but DCSD's version includes baseline data as an additional required element beyond the standard SMART acronym.
| Element | What It Requires | Noncompliant Example | Compliant Example |
|---|---|---|---|
| Target Behavior | A specific, observable, active verb describing what the student will do | "will improve," "will understand," "will develop" | "will read aloud," "will solve," "will identify" |
| Condition | The context or material under which the behavior will be performed | "during reading," "in math" (too broad) | "given a 3rd grade passage," "when presented with 20 double-digit problems" |
| Criterion | A specific, measurable performance standard | "will improve scores," "determined by teacher observation" | "at 85% accuracy on 3 consecutive probes," "95 words correct per minute" |
| Timeframe | A specific date or period by which the criterion will be met | No timeframe listed; "eventually" | "by May 2026," "by the end of the second semester" |
| Baseline (DCSD) | Current performance level drawn from the PLAAFP | Goal written without any baseline reference | "Baseline: currently reads 48 wcpm at grade 4 level" |
Complete Goal Example
Baseline: Destiny currently reads 48 words correct per minute (wcpm) on 4th grade passages; grade-level expectation is 120–140 wcpm.
Goal: "Given a 4th grade reading passage, Destiny will read aloud at a rate of 90 words correct per minute with fewer than 5 errors, as measured by weekly CBM probes, by May 2026."
Goal: "Given a 4th grade reading passage, Destiny will read aloud at a rate of 90 words correct per minute with fewer than 5 errors, as measured by weekly CBM probes, by May 2026."
The Endrew F. Balance: Ambitious But Realistic
The goal above expects Destiny to gain 42 wcpm over the year — an ambitious but achievable target given her trajectory. Goals must be challenging. They must not be so ambitious as to be unrealistic, nor so modest as to reflect low expectations.
Both Extremes Are Noncompliant
Too easy: A goal that is the same year after year is not a meaningful annual goal — it has effectively become meaningless. If a student meets a goal but you repeat it the following year without explanation, the goal is too vague or too broad.
Too ambitious: Expecting a student reading 5 years below grade level to reach grade level in 12 months is not realistic and sets up a false standard of FAPE. Goals must be grounded in current data and reasonable growth rates.
Too ambitious: Expecting a student reading 5 years below grade level to reach grade level in 12 months is not realistic and sets up a false standard of FAPE. Goals must be grounded in current data and reasonable growth rates.
Progress Monitoring: DCSD's Three-Step Process
Progress monitoring is not grading. It is a systematic, objective data-collection process used to determine whether the student's instruction is working. The IRIS Center Training Module cited in the DCSD handbook notes that there is probably less substantive compliance with progress monitoring than any other IEP component.
1
Develop SMART Goals With Clear Measurement Criteria
Each goal must specify how progress will be measured (the method), how often data will be collected (at least weekly in DCSD — more frequently is better), who collects the data, and where. If multiple providers collect data on one goal, the method must be consistent across all of them.
2
Collect Data and Make Instructional Decisions
Data must be objective — reported in numbers, not teacher opinion. At each 4.5-week progress monitoring period, analyze whether the student is on trajectory. At the 9-week benchmark: if the student is not on track, change the intervention. Do not wait. Document data in Infinite Campus using the Goal Monitoring tool. Maintain raw data in the student's folder for two years.
3
Report Progress to Parents Every 4.5 Weeks
Progress on IEP goals must be reported to parents on the same schedule as general education academic progress reports. In DCSD, this is every 4.5 weeks. Provide a single report addressing all goals and objectives. If a student is not making adequate progress, the case manager must contact the parent to discuss whether the goal or intervention needs to be revised.
The 9-Week Rule — Do Not Wait
If progress monitoring data shows the student is not on track at the 9-week benchmark, the DCSD handbook requires a direct response: change the intervention. Add another layer. Do something different. The team may also need to convene an IEP meeting to revise the goal. Failure to collect and act on data can result in a ruling that the school denied FAPE.
Knowledge Check — Module 4
Which of the following is a compliant measurable annual goal?
✓ Correct. Option C contains all four required elements: a specific target behavior (identify main idea and two supporting details), a condition (given a 5th grade reading passage), a measurable criterion (80% accuracy across 3 consecutive weekly probes), and a timeframe (by June 2026). A stranger can implement this goal, collect data on it, and determine whether Marcus met it. Options A and B fail because "improve" is not a measurable behavior, and "teacher observation" is explicitly listed as a noncompliant measurement method in the DCSD handbook.
Reference: DCSD Handbook Ch. 5 — Goal Elements table; Progress Monitoring — "Don't: Use subjective measures"
✗ Incorrect. Options A and B both use vague, unmeasurable language. "Improve" cannot be measured. "Teacher observation" is explicitly listed as a noncompliant measurement method in the DCSD handbook because it is subjective. A goal must be specific enough that a stranger can implement it, collect data on it, and determine whether the student met it.
Reference: DCSD Handbook Ch. 5 — Goal Elements; Progress Monitoring — DON'T examples
Module 5 of 6
Student Supports — SDI, Accommodations & Services
The failure to distinguish Specially Designed Instruction from accommodations is a documented compliance problem in DCSD. This module draws that line clearly and applies it to the services grid.
The Critical Distinction: SDI vs. Accommodations
These two categories are not interchangeable. Confusing them is not just a vocabulary error — it is a compliance error that can mean a student receives access tools when they needed instructional intervention, or vice versa.
| Category | What It Changes | Learning Expectations | Examples |
|---|---|---|---|
| Specially Designed Instruction (SDI) | The content, methodology, or delivery of instruction — adapts what is taught or how it is taught to address the disability | Does not lower grade-level expectations | Multisensory phonics instruction (Wilson Reading), explicit strategy instruction, modified pacing with direct instruction in foundational skills |
| Accommodations | How the student accesses instruction or demonstrates knowledge — removes barriers without changing the construct | Does not lower or change expectations | Extended time, preferential seating, text-to-speech, reduced distractions, oral response instead of written |
| Modifications | The content itself — reduces depth, breadth, or complexity of grade-level standards | Lowers expectations. Use sparingly; document carefully; creates gaps over time | Reduced number of problems, simplified text, alternate grading scale |
| Related Services | Supportive services required to enable the student to benefit from special education | Not instructional — support FAPE delivery | Speech-language therapy, occupational therapy, physical therapy, counseling, transportation |
Documented DCSD Failure Pattern
The Walker (2019) investigation found that students in DCSD were not receiving their testing accommodations during standardized assessments. This is an implementation failure. A student whose IEP documents extended time must receive extended time on every assessment — not just when the teacher remembers, not just on classroom tests. The building test coordinator must have an up-to-date list of accommodations for every student before testing begins.
The Services Grid: Required Documentation
Every special education and related service must be documented in the services grid with five required fields. Incomplete services documentation is a procedural IEP violation.
Service Type
What service is being provided (e.g., Special Education — Reading, Speech-Language Therapy, OT)
Frequency
How often the service is provided — be specific (e.g., "5 times per week, 45 minutes each" — not "daily")
Location
Where the service is provided (e.g., general education classroom, special education classroom, speech room)
Start and End Dates
Must match the IEP dates. Services cannot begin before the IEP date or extend beyond the IEP end date without an amendment.
Provider
Who delivers the service (e.g., special education teacher, speech-language pathologist). If you change providers, document the change.
DCSD: Delivery Model
Georgia adds a service delivery model designation (consultative, collaborative, co-teaching, small group outside general ed, etc.) that determines how the service is structured.
Testing Accommodations: The Assessment Determination Section
Classroom accommodations and testing accommodations are related but not identical. Before completing the Assessment Determination section, understand these rules:
- Testing accommodations must match classroom accommodations. An accommodation cannot be used on a statewide assessment if it is not also used for classroom instruction and assessment.
- Every accommodation must be documented in the IEP — even if it is routinely available to all students. If a student requires it due to their disability, it goes in the IEP.
- Students need time to learn accommodations. Do not wait until the week before high-stakes testing to introduce accommodations. Students must have regular practice with each accommodation before it is used on a state assessment.
- GaDOE maintains an approved accommodations list. You may not list an accommodation that is not on the approved list without going through the school or system testing coordinator to request an individual accommodation approval from GaDOE. All requests, including Kurzweil, must be made at least six weeks before the test.
- State testing participation: Every student must participate in either the Georgia Milestones Assessment System (with or without accommodations) or the Georgia Alternate Assessment (GAA 2.0). The GAA 2.0 decision must be made annually and documented in the IEP.
Knowledge Check — Module 5
A student's IEP lists "Wilson Reading Program" and "extended time on tests" under the Accommodations section. Is this correctly categorized?
✓ Correct. Wilson Reading is a structured literacy program that changes the methodology of reading instruction — it modifies how content is taught to address the disability. That is SDI by definition. Listing it as an accommodation misrepresents what the school is committed to providing, can obscure whether SDI was implemented, and could prevent the student from receiving the instructional intervention they need. Extended time is a classic accommodation — it changes how the student demonstrates knowledge, not what they are expected to know.
Reference: DCSD Handbook Ch. 5 — SDI defined; accommodations defined; "SDI modifies content, methodology, or delivery"
✗ Incorrect. SDI and accommodations are legally distinct categories in the IEP. Placing SDI in the accommodations section misrepresents the district's legal commitment and obscures whether the student received specially designed instruction. Wilson Reading modifies the instructional methodology — that is SDI.
Reference: DCSD Handbook Ch. 5 — SDI vs. accommodations
Module 6 of 6
LRE, Placement & Procedural Safeguards
Placement is not the starting point — it is the conclusion of a process. This module covers the LRE decision sequence, Prior Written Notice, and the procedural rights that protect parents throughout the IEP process.
Special Education Is a Service, Not a Place
The single most important reframing in LRE: special education is a service delivered to a student, not a location where a student is sent. Placement decisions must follow programming decisions — you determine what the student needs first, then determine where those needs can best be met.
Common Procedural Error — Predetermination
Deciding a student's placement before the IEP meeting — before goals are developed, before the team collaborates, before the parent participates — is predetermination. It is one of the most serious procedural violations under IDEA. The IEP team may discuss and consider placement options informally before the meeting. It may not finalize them.
The LRE Decision Sequence
DCSD's handbook lays out a specific sequence for LRE decisions. Follow it in this order — every time, for every student.
1
Update the PLAAFP
Current performance data must drive every decision that follows. The PLAAFP is not a formality — it is the evidence base for placement.
2
Develop Goals Using PLAAFP Deficits
Goals come from needs. Not from grade-level standards alone. Not from what the previous teacher wrote. From this student's documented needs in this PLAAFP.
3
Determine Whether Goals Can Be Addressed in General Education
Ask this question for each goal individually. The answer may be different for different goals. Always start with the presumption that the general education setting is the right place.
4
Identify What Accommodations and Supports Would Be Needed
What would it take to make general education work for this student? Supplementary aids, personnel supports, co-teaching? Document these in the IEP before concluding general education is insufficient.
5
Only Then Determine Alternative Placement If Necessary
Removal from general education is justified only when the nature or severity of the disability is such that education in general education settings — even with supplementary aids and services — cannot be achieved satisfactorily. The further from general education, the more rationale is required in the IEP.
6
Identify Opportunities for Interaction With Non-Disabled Peers
Even for students in more restrictive settings, the IEP must address opportunities for interaction with non-disabled peers in nonacademic and extracurricular activities (lunch, recess, clubs, field trips).
Writing the Non-Participation Justification
When a student is removed from the general education setting for any portion of the day, the IEP must include a written statement explaining why. There are specific rules about what goes in this section:
Include
The specific reason the student requires a different setting, grounded in the disability's impact on learning. Why education in the general classroom cannot be achieved satisfactorily even with supports. How the disability's nature or severity requires the alternative setting.
Do NOT Include
Courses or class names. Options that were rejected. Statements about what services will be provided (those go in the services grid). Language that could apply to any student with the same disability category.
Prior Written Notice: When It Is Required
Prior Written Notice (PWN) is a required written document the district must provide to parents before proposing or refusing any change related to identification, evaluation, educational placement, or the provision of FAPE. It is not optional and it is not the same as meeting minutes.
PWN is required whenever the district proposes to:
- Initiate or change the identification of a student as having a disability
- Initiate or change the evaluation of a student
- Initiate or change the educational placement of a student
- Change any component of the provision of FAPE — including goals, services, accommodations, SDI, ESY, or placement
- Refuse to take any of the above actions when a parent has requested them
DCSD Practice
DCSD uses a separate Prior Written Notice form — not meeting minutes — for all PWN requirements. The LTSE must review all PWN documents before they are provided to parents. Case managers complete the PWN; the LTSE reviews it. If you are unsure whether a PWN is required for a given situation, ask your LTSE before proceeding.
Knowledge Check — Module 6
A parent requests that her child's special education services be increased from 3 to 5 hours per week. After reviewing the data, the IEP team determines the current level of service is appropriate and decides not to increase it. What is required?
✓ Correct. Prior Written Notice is required when the district refuses to take an action requested by a parent. Refusing to increase services is a refusal to change the provision of FAPE. PWN must include: a description of the action refused, an explanation of why the district is refusing, a description of each evaluation or record used as the basis for the refusal, a statement of other options considered, and a statement that the parent has procedural rights under IDEA. Meeting minutes do not substitute for PWN.
Reference: DCSD Handbook Ch. 22 — Prior Written Notice; IDEA 34 C.F.R. §300.503
✗ Incorrect. Whenever the district refuses to take an action requested by a parent — including refusing to change services — Prior Written Notice is required. Meeting minutes are not a substitute. PWN is a separate required document with specific required content.
Reference: DCSD Handbook Ch. 22 — Prior Written Notice; IDEA 34 C.F.R. §300.503
🎓
You Have Completed IEP Blueprint
You now have the foundational legal and procedural knowledge to construct a compliant IEP. Use the simulation below to practice the skills from every module before you apply them to your students' IEPs.