Legislation to Deter School Lawsuits Against Students, Parents Passed House

OKLAHOMA CITY –Legislation that would discourage “abusive and frivolous” lawsuits by schools districts passed out of the House of Representatives today and now heads to the Senate.

House Bill 2160, by State Rep. Jason Nelson, would require school districts to pay students’ and parents’ court costs and attorney fees when they initiate civil action or proceedings against students or parents.

“We saw a disgusting abuse of power when the leaders of Jenks and Union schools targeted the parents of special-needs children with a completely bogus lawsuit that could only be understood as an intimidation tactic,” said Nelson, R-Oklahoma City. “I’ve visited with numerous people who shudder at the idea of a school district suing parents. These two districts eventually lost the case upon appeal with the Oklahoma Supreme Court, but it still angers me that they put these families through such an ordeal. The only thing that the parents could have been guilty of was doing what they thought was best for their child with special needs.”

The Jenks and Union school boards voted to sue the state attorney general to challenge the successful Lindsey Nicole Henry Scholarships for Students with Disabilities Program Act. They never filed that lawsuit, but instead, without ever specifically voting to do so, sued parents who legally obtained scholarships through the new program.

“These two school boards had earlier voted to ignore the new State law and later voted to sue the attorney general to get their question in front of a judge,” Nelson said. “When that didn’t work they sued the parents without ever voting to do so specifically. They left that decision to the school superintendent and the school’s law firm. They didn’t even have the courage to vote in a board meeting to sue parents – it was shameful.”

Lindsey Nicole Henry Scholarships allow a student with a disability (such as Down syndrome or Autism) who has an individualized education program (IEP) to receive state-funded scholarships to attend a private school that parents believe can better serve their child. The scholarships come from the amount of money already designated for the education of those children.

Nelson said his legislation would deter schools from filing such lawsuits, which are inappropriate because schools serve the public and should not be persecuting students and parents.

“I never doubted that the lawsuit was inappropriate and the Oklahoma Supreme Court’s ruling confirmed that a school board should not be suing parents. My bill says that if a school district sues parents again, they will have to pay the court and attorney costs,” Nelson said.

HB 2160 passed out of the House by a vote of 55-37. The measure now heads to the Senate for consideration.

Ultimate Education Accountability: Henry Scholarships

Oklahoma Capitol - (Commentary) I received an anonymous comment on a blog post recently implying the Lindsey Nicole Henry Scholarship Program lacks accountability. That’s news to me and to the parents and students using the program.

The writer complained the program “allows parents to take public dollars and remove their students to a private curriculum ... with no accountability.” They said this alleged lack of accountability has not been addressed in the debate surrounding this law.

The Lindsey Nicole Henry Scholarship Act allows students with a disability on an individualized education program (IEP) to receive state-funded scholarships to attend private school. The scholarships are funded with money already designated for the child’s education.

The issue of accountability has been addressed innumerable times by me and other supporters of the program - including parents. The problem is not that supporters have failed to address the issue, but that opponents of the program don’t like the answer. What is the answer, and why don’t they like it?

In some respects, private schools are accountable just like public schools. Both public and private schools answer to boards. The anonymous writer, who posts under the pseudonym okeducationtruths, acknowledges that private schools, like public schools, must also be accredited by the State Department of Education.

State Department of Education rules require that the accreditation standards of private schools “must be comparable with the State Board of Education's standards for public schools in terms of the applicable quality indicators.” State requirements for private school accreditation, in part, are as follows:

“The program of the school shall be designed in the best interests of the students, and students are admitted only when it has been determined that there are reasonable expectations that the students' best interests can be served. The program, while appropriately adjusted to serve the best interest of its students and to be consistent with the school's philosophy and objectives, complies with applicable rules of the State Board of Education, especially in the following areas: (i) Length of the school day and school year; (ii) The basic skills subjects in the elementary curriculum including subjects which constitute a well-balanced elementary curriculum; instructional time requirements and essential elements which are comparable to those required in the like subjects at equivalent grade levels in the public school system; student academic records; and achievement levels required for promotion; and (iii) The appropriate subjects in the secondary curriculum, including sequencing of courses for which transferability of credit may be sought from the state; essential elements which are comparable to those required in the like subjects and courses at equivalent grade levels by the state; student academic records; and achievement levels necessary for the awarding of credits and diplomas.” Also, “Professional staff members must hold degrees and be qualified by preparation or experience for positions they hold and for the work to which they are assigned.”

Private schools are also accountable to parents in a way that public schools are not. If parents are unhappy with a private school, they can take their child and corresponding funds elsewhere.

Without the scholarship, parents who are dissatisfied with their child’s public education, and who don’t have the means to move to a different district or pay out-of-pocket for private school find their child stuck in a public school unwilling or unable to meet their educational needs.

Opponents complain private schools aren’t regulated exactly like public schools. The anonymous protest left on this blog says private schools “do not have to teach the state-legislated curriculum or take state-mandated tests.” To that charge I respond, yes, private schools are different from public schools. 

The public school system is a government monopoly that can be unresponsive to the needs of some students. It is financially difficult, if not impossible, for most parents of children with special-needs who are dissatisfied with their child’s public education to leave their assigned public school. The Lindsey Nicole Henry Scholarship law provides a new option for special-needs students in such situations. As long as public schools are effectively a monopoly, they will need to be regulated. 

Private schools are not a monopoly. Unhappy private school patrons can easily leave a poor performing private school. So, the need to regulate these schools is considerably less. Still, there are reasonable regulation and expectations placed on private schools that participate in the scholarship program. It is common sense to most people that when consumers have more choices there is less need for regulation.

When public schools fail students, they are given several years to attempt improvement. They also use this time to fill the Capitol with lobbyists to make excuses and delay intervention. Poor performing private schools simply lose paying students and go out of existence. 

What really offends opponents of the program is the Henry Scholarship law empowers parents of special-needs students to hold schools accountable - a role the education establishment believes should be solely theirs.

Why don’t opponents of the program accept the answer?

Some opponents, including legislators, public school administrators and others, have been so bold as to publicly criticize parents who make use of the program as ignorant and not acting in the best interest of their children.

The website for Jenks Public Schools, one of two districts suing parents for participating in the program, states: 

“[E]ducators are greatly concerned at the very real possibility that a student with special needs can be pulled out of a public school and placed in a private school that may not offer any Special Education services.”

It’s important to remember that parents are the decision makers in the scholarship program. If a student is “pulled out of a public school and placed in a private school” it is because the parents believe it is best for their child.

Julie Blake, the director of student programs at Jenks, is more direct in her opinion that parents should not be making important decision such as choosing where their child attends school.

"Parents, I'm afraid, are unaware what they are giving up. Our concern is that our students are out there without anyone watching over them."

It’s as if the children really belong to the public schools system and are simply lent to parents for the evening and summer break. Educators at Jenks evidently don’t think parents are the appropriate people to make such important decisions on behalf of the public school system’s children. 

Union Public Schools’ Superintendent Cathy Burden echoes the concern about allowing parents to decide where their child attends school.

“[Parents] are giving up due process rights, continued IEP, auxiliary services, free and appropriate education, annual evaluations. ... There are a variety of things guaranteed to students and parents that would be lost."

They assume that parents aren’t familiar with these “guaranteed” services. These public school services are required by the federal special education law, the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). The IDEA was necessary to protect special-needs students in public schools. The goal has been to ensure children with special-needs get the education they deserve because historically they had not.

Former State Rep. Neil Brannon, D-Arkoma, said during his debate against the program on the House floor, “[Parents] may think they know what’s best, but do they?”

Have we drifted so far as a society that parents aren’t considered capable of making important decisions for their children? Are parents incapable of holding a school accountable if they are economically empowered to choose the school their child attends?

I know parents who choose to use the program love their children more than the public school system does and parents are perfectly capable of making big decisions based on the best interests of their child.

A few parents have used the scholarship to transfer their child to a private school only to later transfer back to the public school. Is the decision by these parents to send their child back to public school also suspect?

There is a definite lack of accountability in special education programs in public schools - or at least a discernible lack of interest. Of the eight school boards that originally voted to ignore the law, including the two boards currently suing parents, I am aware of only two school board members who have wondered why parents and students would want to leave and attempted to look into the matter. This is very troubling. There is no apparent interest among these school boards to investigate the reasons some parents are dissatisfied. The Board for Tulsa Public Schools, at the request of the two board members I mentioned, said they would look into parents’ concerns. I’m not aware of any reports resulting from this promise.

Privates schools participating in the Lindsey Nicole Henry Scholarships for Students with Disabilities Program Act are held accountable through the accreditation process, oversight from their boards and ultimately the parents who choose the school for their child. There is accountability - opponents just don’t like the program. 

Who better than parents to ultimately make these decisions and hold schools accountable? 

Henry Scholarships Documentary Showing Planned Next Week

The public is invited to a showing of a 30-minute documentary that describes how the Lindsey Nicole Henry Scholarships are changing the lives of Oklahoma families. The showing will be followed by a panel discussion on the future of the scholarships with law professor Andrew Spiropoulos and state Rep. Jason Nelson.

The even will be held Tuesday, July 31, 2012 at 7:00 PM at: 

Constitution Hall, Nigh University Center, University of Central Oklahoma
100 North University Drive, Edmond, OK 73034

Tickets are free but space is limited. Visit http://henryscholarships.eventbrite.com/ to reserve your seat. 

Lindsey Henry Scholarship lawsuit a defining case and controversy

By Andrew C. Spiropoulos 

The Journal Record
June 7, 2012

The Oklahoma Supreme Court recently announced that it will hear the appeal by parents of disabled children of the decision by a state district court judge that the state’s Lindsey Nicole Henry Scholarship for Students with Disabilities is unconstitutional because it violates our state constitution’s provision governing the proper relationship between religion and the state.

There is, however, another vital constitutional principle at stake in this case. Some consider this other principle to be a legal technicality, a senseless barrier preventing the courts from settling our political controversies. But adhering to this principle is indispensable to the maintenance of the rule of law, and bending or even ignoring it, as the school districts in this case have asked the courts to do, threatens the legitimacy of judicial authority.

Americans are willing to grant judges their great authority to have the final say on the meaning of the law on the condition that they only decide questions that are properly committed to them. A judge only may act when presented with what the U.S. Constitution calls a genuine “case or controversy.”

When is there a real case and controversy? The principle is easy to state, but hard to faithfully follow. Judges should only exercise their authority when the person or entity seeking relief has been injured by the defendant and the court, by issuing an order to the defendant, can remedy the harm.

In this case, the families who decided that the public schools failed to meet the needs of their children removed them from the public schools and asked the state Department of Education for a scholarship to attend a private school. The schools argue that they are hurt by the law because the law establishing the scholarship instructs the department to deduct the total amount of scholarship money from the general school aid budget. The schools, therefore, allege that, eventually, they will receive less money because of the scholarship program.

But that’s not true at all. The schools aren’t getting less money because of the scholarship program – no one is taking money from their account and giving it to the private schools. Remember that school aid is calculated per enrolled student. The schools are getting less aid because they have fewer students. It doesn’t matter why these parents left the school. No matter what, the result would be the same.

The schools, in essence, are suing the parents for doing what they had every right to do – leave the public schools. Nothing the parents have done, no more than when parents decide to leave the state for better economic opportunities, constitutes a legal injury to the schools.

Furthermore, even if the court invalidates the scholarship, it is unlikely that parents will send their children back to the place where they, at best, were neglected, and, at worst, bullied and abused. Even if the state is no longer allowed to help these parents, the court has no power to remedy the schools’ alleged harm. The public schools will still have fewer students and proportionately lower funding.

There is no need for the courts to involve themselves in this bitter political dispute. These school districts haven’t suffered any legal injury; they just don’t like the public policy embodied in the program and want the courts to use their power, legitimately or not, to impose their view on the majority.

Andrew C. Spiropoulos is a professor of law at the Oklahoma City University School of Law and the Milton Friedman Distinguished Fellow at the Oklahoma Council of Public Affairs.

60 Seconds From Parents Supporting A Program That Works

Please share this 60 second video about the Lindsey Nicole Henry Scholarships for Students with Disabilities Program Act. 

This simple program is changing the lives of many children in Oklahoma for the better. A district judge ruled earlier this year that the 2010 law is unconstitutional. The Oklahoma Supreme Court agreed earlier this week to hear an appeal by parents who are being sued by two school districts for using the program to help their children. I hope you will support this program and let others know you think it is important that it be protected for the sake of special-needs children now and in the future. 

Nelson: Court Ruling Just First Round of Fight for Students with Special-needs

OKLAHOMA CITY – State Rep. Jason Nelson said a Tulsa judge’s ruling against a law providing scholarships to special-needs students is just “one battle in the overall fight to help special-needs children” and vowed to continue advocating for families in need.

“I will keep fighting for the families and fighting to uphold this very necessary law,” said Nelson, R-Oklahoma City. “I support an appeal to the Supreme Court and a motion for a stay of the judge’s ruling pending an appeal. The strong reason we needed this law in the first place still stands – to help families of special-needs students who are not being served by public schools.”

Nelson noted the judge’s ruling could have far-reaching consequences for Oklahomans.

“The judge’s ruling is baffling and will likely impact many state programs affecting everything from preschool to Medicaid,” Nelson said. “The judge ruled on the merits without comment, perhaps because her decision is indefensible.”

The Lindsey Nicole Henry Scholarship Act allows students with a disability on an individualized education program (IEP) to receive state-funded scholarships to attend private school. The scholarships are funded with money already designated for the child’s education.

In response, the Jenks and Union school districts sued some of the parents of children with special needs who obtained the scholarships provided by the law.

Under the judge’s ruling, Nelson noted that it is now possible for Medicaid patients to be sued for being treated at a Catholic hospital.

“This is a horrible precedent,” Nelson said. “It’s like suing grandma for using Medicare. I will keep fighting to defend parents’ rights to do what is best for their children. This is the standard everywhere else in state government. This ruling now calls into question other critical programs in health care, foster care, prison ministries, preschool and higher education tuition grants.”

Nelson praised the parents of special-needs students for staying strong.

“These parents have displayed great courage while going through an unprecedented legal assault by two government school districts,” Nelson said. “They have not backed down, and neither will I.”

Nelson thanked the Becket Fund for coming to the aid of the parents of special-needs children, as well as Attorney General Scott Pruitt, who defended the law, and Bob Latham, local council for the School Choice Coalition. He also thanked state Sen. Patrick Anderson (R-Enid), who co-authored the law, and all legislative colleagues “who supported these parents.”

“Most of all, I want to thank former Governor Brad Henry and his family for supporting the program and allowing the law to be named for Lindsey,” Nelson said.

Lindsey Henry Scholarships, New Partnerships Lead to New School for Students with Autism

A new private school serving special needs children opened recently providing a new option to children in the Oklahoma City area.

According the Sooner Catholic, The Good Shepherd Catholic School may be “the only one of its kind in the United States.” 

The specialized school opened on the campus of Mercy Hospital in Northwest Oklahoma City in September. The Good Shepherd Catholic School at Mercy is a collaborative effort between the Archdiocese of Oklahoma City, the University of Central Oklahoma and Mercy Health. 

The school is designed for children, ages 3 to 9, with autism and “other similar neurological disorders.” The school started with six students and plans to expand to serve 20 students in the future. 

The Superintendent of Education for the Archdiocese of Oklahoma City, Sister Catherine Powers, said in the November 20 edition of Sooner Catholic, 

“The three-way collaboration itself is unique. However, what is even more special is that, to my knowledge, there is no other Catholic school in the country that is geared toward meeting the individual needs of children on the autistic spectrum. I have no doubt that we are meeting a great need among our families in the Oklahoma City area.”

According to the story, the University of Central Oklahoma Behavioral Therapy program will provide teachers. Specialists will work with each child on a daily basis. 

Mercy CEO Di Smalley acknowledged that the Lindsey Nicole Henry Scholarships for Students with Disabilities Program Act was an important consideration in the creation of the new school.

Dr. Donna Kearns will serve as principal for the school. For more information on enrollment, contact Kearns at (405) 752-2264.

Partnership with UCO

Several years ago, a state pilot program provided thousands to parents of children with autism to obtain treatment in the private sector. Most of the money was returned unspent because there were simply no therapists available.

That led legislators, working with officials at the University of Central Oklahoma, to establish a training program for behavioral therapists. Students in that program soon needed venues for hands-on application, which led to efforts to create schools for children with autism.

One such school, run by the Easter Seals of Oklahoma, soon folded because of the significant cost of operation.

However, thanks to funding provided through the Lindsey Nicole Henry Scholarship Program, officials expect better results.

“If it were not for the Lindsay Nicole Henry Scholarship Program, the creation of this school could not have happened,” said Mary Sweet-Darter, director of UCO’s learning and behavioral clinic. “The scholarship program is everything. Were it not for that, the options available to parents of children on the autistic spectrum would be very limited.”

“If the Legislature had not taken the initiative to create a program to train therapists, and if they had not passed the scholarship program, none of this could have happened,” Sweet-Darter said.

Fortunately, Jenks & Union Administrators Are Not Representative of All Educators

By state Rep. Jason Nelson, R-Oklahoma City, author of the Lindsey Nicole Henry Scholarship Act, printed in the Journal Record today.

OKLAHOMA CITY – Recently, defenders of administrators in Jenks and Union schools have claimed any criticism of them is somehow an attack on all educators.

Sorry, but that dog won’t hunt. The core issue is too easy to understand and the administrators are clearly in the wrong.

In a nutshell, these two districts are suing parents for doing what is best for their kids.

These parents are using the Lindsey Nicole Henry Scholarship Act, which allows students with a disability on an individualized education program (IEP) to receive state-funded scholarships to attend private school. The scholarships are funded with money already designated for the child’s education.

Jenks and Union administrators don’t like the law. However, rather than properly challenging it in court, they chose to sue parents of special-needs children seeking scholarships.

It is inexcusable that district administrators would sue parents for being too involved in the education of their own children.

The proper way for them to challenge the law is to sue the state.

There’s an Oklahoma City attorney who routinely challenges state laws in court with some success.

If a private citizen can do it, surely these two administrators (and their expensive law firm) can figure it out.

They could have challenged the scholarship law in court before it went into effect more than a year ago. They didn’t.

The schools’ boards eventually voted to sue the state attorney general to challenge the law, but never did.

These administrators continue to reject legitimate avenues to challenge the law.

Instead, they are suing parents of children with very real special needs in an attempt to punish these families and intimidate others. Rather than work to provide quality educational opportunities for each child, Jenks and Union are attempting to “make an example” of families who already face significant challenges.

For these reasons, I have been an outspoken critic of Jenks and Union administrators. People are free to disagree, but to claim all teachers in Oklahoma should be lumped together with those administrators (as Scott Carter did in a recent column) slanders the reputation of every hard-working teacher in the state.

My criticisms have been directed at the administrators of these two districts and not the educators in my family or educators in general. To say otherwise is simply desperate political spin. I don’t need rhetorical misdirection to make my case. Apparently, defenders of these administrators can’t say the same thing.

Nelson: Jenks & Union Schools Should Get Used to Criticism

This release is in response to a Tulsa World news story today regarding Jennifer Carter's use of the word “dirtbags” in a tweet nearly a month ago.  Carter tweeted when she learned that administrators in the Jenks and Union school districts were suing parents of special-needs students who are using scholarships available through the Lindsay Nicole Henry Scholarships for Students with Disabilities Program Act.

Link to video

OKLAHOMA CITY – State Rep. Jason Nelson said the leaders of the Jenks and Union Public Schools should get used to criticism after targeting the parents of special-needs children with a frivolous lawsuit.

He said criticism is more than warranted in light of the districts’ apparent continued violation of state law and mistreatment of special-needs children.

“Apparently, Jenks and Union officials are shocked that anyone would call them ‘dirtbags’ for persecuting the families of children with special needs,” said Nelson, R-Oklahoma City. “I’ve got news for them: Get used to it. Oklahoma citizens will no longer stand by while wealthy school bureaucrats abuse their power.

“I believe these districts continue to violate state law and know their actions are indefensible - which is likely the reason they did not include ‘suing parents’ on any school board agenda,” Nelson said. “I’ve not heard one person defend suing parents outside the administrators of Jenks and Union schools. I’ve visited with numerous people who shudder at the idea of a school district suing parents – especially in this case – and many of them used far more colorful language to express their opinion.”

Several months ago, the Jenks and Union school boards voted to sue the state attorney general to challenge the successful Lindsey Nicole Henry Scholarships for Students with Disabilities Program Act. However, they never filed that lawsuit, and instead suddenly sued parents who legally obtained scholarships as a result of the law.

Lindsey Nicole Henry Scholarships allow a student with a disability (such as Down syndrome or Autism) who has an individualized education program (IEP) to receive state-funded scholarships to attend a private school that parents believe can better serve their child. The scholarships come from the amount of money already designated for the education of those children.

“At the start of September, the amount spent on all students receiving these scholarships statewide was a combined total of $197,345 – far less than the combined salaries of the two superintendents at Jenks and Union,” said Nelson, who authored the scholarship law. “When you have school administrators obsessing over a month-old, offhand, one-word Twitter comment instead of working to provide each child a quality education, that suggests the school funds being wasted are those spent on administrators’ fat paychecks and not the pittance spent helping educate children with special needs.”

Temple Grandin Interviewed About Autism And Education

Rob McClendon, Host of the OETA show Oklahoma Horizon interviews Dr. Temple Grandin, a top advocate in the understanding of Autism, and also respected for the invention of more humane animal handling practices. 


Grandin is a person with high-functioning Autism. Her life was the subject of an HBO film released in 2010 which was nominated for 15 Emmys winning five awards. 


This interview took place last summer when Grandin was in Stillwater to receive an award on the OSU campus. The show aired last fall. 


In this part of the interview Grandin discusses the importance of the right education for children with Autism. I was interviewed at the same time about House Bill 3393, the Lindsey Nicole Henry Scholarship for Students with Disabilities Program, which had recently been signed into law. She is a fascinating person and I was fortunate to have the opportunity to visit with her between interviews about the importance of students with Autism receiving the right kind of education. 

Governor Signs Special Needs Scholarship Modifications

Changes Will End Continued Defiance by Rogue Districts

Gov. Mary Fallin has signed legislation modifying the Lindsey Nicole Henry Scholarships for Students with Disabilities Program Act to ensure children with special needs receive scholarships in a prompt manner.

House Bill 1744 by State Rep. Jason Nelson (R-Oklahoma City) and State Sen. Patrick Anderson (R-Enid) changes the law so school districts will no longer administer the program. Instead, the Department of Education will administer it.

“Last year, several school districts failed to provide scholarships to eligible special needs students, flagrantly violating the law,” said Nelson. “Thanks to the modifications in this bill, the State Department of Education will administer the program rather than local school districts. This will provide consistency and certainty for students and parents who choose to participate in the program.”

Last year, lawmakers voted allow a student with a disability (such as those with Down syndrome or Autism) who has an individualized education program (IEP) to receive state-funded scholarships to attend a private school. The scholarships come from the amount of money already designated for the education of those children.

After the program went into effect last August, several Tulsa-area schools voted to break the law, leading lawmakers to adjust the program this year.

The Department of Education will have the authority to reduce state aid to school districts that have failed to comply with provisions of the program since it went into effect nine months ago this week. This will allow the Department of Education to pay scholarships for the current school year if it is determined that a local district has failed to follow the law.

“I’ve been stunned by the contempt some school districts have shown toward the law and these children,” Nelson said. “I’m told by parents that some local districts, in addition to ignoring the new law, are attempting to ignore existing transfer laws in order to deny scholarships to eligible students and have resorted to telling parents that the scholarships are taxable, hoping that will keep them from participating in the program. House Bill 1744 will ensure rogue officials don’t continue to cause problems for these students and their parents.”

Earlier this year State Superintendent Janet Barresi was forced to send a letter to the superintendent of Union Public Schools informing her that a new transfer policy passed by the school board was in conflict with existing student transfer laws.

There is a pending request for an opinion from Attorney General Scott Pruitt to determine if scholarships are taxable as income. However, opinions from other attorneys state that the scholarships are not taxable including one from an attorney with a law firm that represents several school districts.

House Bill 1744 clarifies that parents can use the scholarships to pay private schools for assessment fees, services and therapies to address the needs of the student. Upon acceptance of the scholarship, parents assume full financial responsibility for the education of the student and transportation to and from the private school.

The measure instructs the Department of Education to establish a toll-free number and website where parents can get information and assistance.

According to the State Department of Education 52 students from 18 school districts are currently using the scholarship to attend a private school of their choice.

The legislation also creates a Special Education Statewide Cooperative Task Force to study ways to improve special education and related services.

House Bill 1744 easily passed both chambers of the Legislature, receiving bipartisan support. The bill passed the Oklahoma House of Representatives 64-25 and passed the State Senate 36-9.

Link to interview

Task Force to Study Special Education, Propose Statewide Plan

A task force has been created by the legislature to study how special education and related services are provided to students and to develop a plan to implement a special education statewide cooperative. The Special Education Statewide Cooperative Task Force was included in House Bill 1744 that was signed by Gov. Mary Fallin on Thursday.

"I'm asking for anyone with suggestions of individuals who may be qualified for appointment to the task force to submit those names to me or to the respective appointing authority listed in the legislation," said State Rep. Jason Nelson, R-Oklahoma City, author of HB1744. "The work of the task force begins in July so it is important to identify potential task force members quickly so all the positions can be filled in time."

Below is the text of the task force language of HB1744:

A. There is hereby created until May 31, 2012, the Special Education Statewide Cooperative Task Force.

B. The Task Force shall study and develop a plan to provide for the delivery of special education and related services to students with disabilities for whom an individualized education program (IEP) has been developed in accordance with the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) through a statewide special education cooperative which will result in improved outcomes. The Task Force shall study, review and make recommendations on the following:

1. The appropriate governance and organizational structure for a statewide special education cooperative;
2. What resources are needed and available to support a statewide special education cooperative;
3. Which students should participate in the statewide special education cooperative;
4. How special education services can be improved through improved economies of scale;
5. How students will be enrolled in or provided services through the statewide special education cooperative;
6. How the services of teachers and other related personnel will be provided by the statewide special education cooperative;
7. How equipment and other resources that support and benefit students with an IEP will be provided by the statewide special education cooperative;
8. How partnerships with school districts, technology center school districts, higher education institutions, and any other public or private entities will benefit students with an IEP;
9. The relevant federal IDEA compliance issues;
10. How assessments for placing students on an IEP can be improved; and
11. Any other relevant issues.

C. The Task Force shall consist of sixteen (16) members as follows:

1. The State Superintendent of Public Instruction or designee;
2. The Secretary of Education or designee;
3. An executive director of a special education cooperative, appointed by the Governor;
4. A special education director of a special education cooperative, appointed by the Speaker of the House of Representatives;
5. A service provider of special-education-related services, appointed by the President Pro Tempore of the Senate;
6. A special education teacher, appointed by the State Superintendent of Public Instruction;
7. A parent representing the federally funded parent training and information center for Oklahoma known as the Oklahoma Parent Center, appointed by the Governor;
8. A parent representing a private association which advocates for individual with disabilities, appointed by the Speaker of the House of Representatives;
9. A person representing a sheltered workshop, appointed by the President Pro Tempore of the Senate;
10. A private employer who employees individuals with disabilities, appointed by the State Superintendent of Public Instruction;
11. A disability coordinator for a higher education institution, appointed by the Governor;
12. A representative of a technology center school district, appointed by the Speaker of the House of Representatives;
13. A representative of the federally funded protection and advocacy system for Oklahoma known as the Oklahoma Disability Law Center, appointed by the President Pro Tempore of the Senate;
14. A self advocate, appointed by the State Superintendent of Public Instruction;
15. A member of the House of Representatives, appointed by the Speaker of the House of Representatives; and
16. A member of the Senate, appointed by the President Pro Tempore of the Senate.

D. The member of the House of Representatives and the member of the Senate shall serve as cochairs of the Task Force. Appointments to the Task Force shall be made within thirty (30) days after the effective date of this act. Meetings of the Task Force shall be held at the call of either cochair of the Task Force. Members shall serve at the pleasure of their appointing authorities. A majority of the members of the Task Force shall constitute a quorum to transact business, but no vacancy shall impair the right of the remaining members to exercise all of the powers of the Task Force. A vacancy on the Task Force shall be filled by the original appointing authority. Staff support for the Task Force shall be provided by the staff of the House of Representatives, Senate and State Department of Education. The Oklahoma Department of Career and Technology Education, Oklahoma State Regents for Higher Education, Office of Disability Concerns, State Department of Rehabilitation Services, Oklahoma Health Care Authority, Department of Human Services, and the State Use Committee for the Department of Central Services shall provide support and information as requested by the Task Force.

E. Members of the Task Force shall receive no compensation for serving on the Task Force, but may receive travel reimbursement, contingent on the availability of public or private funds for this purpose.

F. The Task Force may seek the assistance of the Legislative Service Bureau or the State Board of Education to contract with an independent consultant as necessary to fulfill the duties specified in this section contingent on the availability of funds.

G. The Task Force shall submit a preliminary report by December 31, 2011, and a final report by May 31, 2012, to the Governor, the President Pro Tempore of the Senate, and the Speaker of the House of Representatives.

Parents of Disabled Children Sue Tulsa School Districts For Denying State-Mandated Scholarships

This week, parents of thirteen special needs children filed suit in Tulsa federal district court against four public school districts in the Tulsa area that have denied the children state-mandated scholarships that will help them get specialized education.
The lawsuit, entitled Kimery v. Broken Arrow Public Schools, challenges the decision by Broken Arrow, Jenks, Tulsa, and Union school districts to defy Oklahoma's Lindsey Nicole Henry Scholarship for Students with Disabilities Program Act (commonly known as “H.B. 3393”). The Act guarantees parents of children with special needs a scholarship that enables them to send their children to private schools that can tailor instruction to those needs.

The disabled children in the lawsuit suffer from several different disabilities, including autism, Asperger's syndrome (a disorder on the autism spectrum), sensory processing disorders, significant learning disabilities, and many other disorders and disabilities. All of the children were suffering academically in public school. And most of the children have been bullied severely by other children in the public school population. One student was beaten with nunchucks while in public school. Another cried himself to sleep nearly every night due to constant bullying. In some cases the children have been merely “warehoused” by the school districts rather than receiving instruction.

The school districts claim that the scholarships law violates parts of the Oklahoma Constitution, but they have also frequently expressed concerns about losing the additional state funding that follows special needs children. The school districts are the only school districts out of 541 statewide that announced that they would not comply with state law. After being pressured by the state’s Attorney General, the districts changed their position, stating that they would comply with the law and would instead seek a declaratory judgment regarding the constitutionality of the law. But that never happened. Instead, the parents in the lawsuit allege, the districts retaliated against them for seeking scholarships by reducing their awards and significantly complicating their attempts to claim those benefits.

Eric Rassbach, the Becket Fund’s National Litigation Director, said “These school districts put the ‘heartless’ in ‘heartless bureaucrat.’ What kind of public servant holds special needs kids hostage to shore up the school district budget? Are these children supposed to be bullied every day so Jenks Public Schools can hold on to a few extra dollars?” Indeed, these special needs students have been in limbo for nearly four months since the school district announced that they would try to comply with state law. Their on going eligibility for program benefits–the source of their educational resources–has been in doubt.

Some of the provisions relied on by the school districts are the notorious Blaine Amendments. Blaine Amendments are state constitutional provisions enacted in forty states during the late nineteenth century and early twentieth century that were designed to thwart the growth of the developing Catholic community in the United States. Today, the Blaine Amendments are interpreted to prohibit all sorts of funding to religious individuals and institutions solely on the basis of their religious identity.

Meir Katz, a Legal Fellow at the Becket Fund and national expert on the Blaine Amendments, said, “These school districts have taken a bigoted law originally designed to punish Catholics and are now using it to punish some of Oklahoma's most vulnerable students.” “What's ironic is that most of these students aren't even trying to attend a religious school. The Blaine Amendments have become a license for governmental abuse; it is about time that the abuse be brought to an end,” he added.

Secretary Duncan's Remarks to the American Association for People with Disabilities

Preparing Students with Disabilities for Success

Arne Duncan
U.S. Secretary of Education

MARCH 15, 2011

It's an absolute honor to be here tonight, and I know our time is short, and I don't want to stand between you and dinner, so I'm going to get right to the point. In order to win the future, as President Obama has challenged us, we must enable every single American to reach their potential, and in my book, all means all. Every child, regardless of income, race, background, or disability can learn and must learn, and our system of education and our system of education, spread across 50 states, 15,000 school districts, and 95,000 schools, must embrace this core belief every day in every way possible.

That's why our administration strongly supports subgroup accountability in No Child Left Behind. This is one thing that No Child Left Behind got absolutely right. Thanks to NCLB, America can no longer ignore those insidious achievement gaps. We can no longer celebrate the success of one group of students if another group of students is still struggling. We have to be open and honest about where we fall short.

But we also have to be much more thoughtful about how to address our education system's shortcomings, and this is what NCLB got wrong. The law mandates one-size-fits-all solutions, no matter what the size or the scope of the challenge. We all know that Washington cannot dictate solutions to schools at the local level. Instead, we must empower local educators to tailor remedies to the students most at risk. And then we'll hold them accountable. We'll demand that every school, district, and state take full responsibility for every single student and focus on closing achievement gaps instead of merely identifying them.

We have to stop admiring the problem. We will also encourage the kind of best practices that we know are most effective, and at the top of that list of best practices is one simple word: inclusion, and by extension, holding students with disabilities to the same high expectations as everybody else. We know, we absolutely know, that when we keep expectations high, students with disabilities excel.

Just yesterday I was at Beers Elementary School here in D.C., which has done an extraordinary job at inclusion. Their philosophy there is as profound as it is simple. They told me repeatedly that they're preparing all their students for success in one society, not a general ed society and not a special ed one. That world simply doesn't exist.

For too long, the answer to educating students with disabilities was to isolate them and to deny them the same educational experiences that others were having, and thankfully, those days are over. The fact is 60% of our students with disabilities spend 80% of their time in the regular school environment. That's real progress, and there's absolutely no reason that those numbers should not continue to rise as more and more teachers know how to effectively work with students with disabilities. All teachers--all teachers--must be equipped with those skills. At the same time, all of the other important indicators for students with disabilities are rising, from student achievement to high-school graduation to college enrollment rates.

As a country, we are doing a much better job today of serving students with disabilities. Meanwhile, the vast majority of students with disabilities are also part of the same accountability system as everyone else, and that's the way it should be.

I want to say here and now for the record that we are moving away from the 2% rule. We will not issue another policy that allows districts to disguise the educational performance of 2% of students. That's unacceptable, and that must change. We have to expect the very best from our students and to tell the truth about student performance so that we can give all students the supports and the services they need.

And if you look at our 2012 budget proposal and our blueprint for rewriting the federal K-12 education law, it's pretty clear where we stand. We want to boost funding for students with disabilities by $200 million, even in these fiscally challenging times. We also want to increase funding by $50 million for infants and toddlers with disabilities.

We want to protect critical programs serving students with disabilities, including preschool grants, national activity funds, vocational rehabilitation programs, national dissemination and research grants, and supports for institutions serving students with disabilities. We want to fund innovative new research programs to help provide people with disabilities who need accommodations with on-demand access to those accommodations any time, any place there's an Internet connection. We also want to continue to support young people with disabilities as they transition to college and the workforce. Students with disabilities, like everyone else, must be college- and career-ready because we know that the good jobs of the future will require more than a high-school diploma. And when they have the education they need to succeed, they will be self-sufficient and be able to live independent lifestyles.

I want to thank our business partners here today, but it's just so important that we assure all of our workplaces welcome everyone. You understand that the best companies draw on the widest range of skills and talents available. Back in Chicago I have some wonderful partnerships with businesses that made it their business to hire my students with disabilities, and we can't do enough to celebrate them. Please give our business partners another round of applause.

Finally, personally, I want to do a much better job of talking about students and people with disabilities, and this is where I know that I have not always met your expectations. Too often, in the everyday churn of activities, I have overlooked one segment of the student population as I have talked about another one. I talk about students in poverty. I talk about children of color, English-language learners, the homeless, and children who live in rural or remote communities, and sometimes I know I don't talk enough about students with disabilities, and people might wonder if I understand the barriers facing students with disabilities in the classroom and in the workforce, and that's when I think back to my mother's tutoring program in a church basement on the south side of Chicago. I spent almost every afternoon of my childhood in that tutoring program with her. My friends were poor children, all African American, and many of them unable to read when they showed up at her door. Back then, fewer children were being diagnosed with ADD or dyslexia. We didn't have all the resources and supports that thankfully exist today. But we understood something much more basic, much more fundamental: we understood that there was no barrier to learning that we cannot overcome.

There is no disability that is bigger or more powerful than our collective will, and there's no greater hunger than the hunger of a child to learn, and that has nothing to do with disabilities, with race, or with poverty. We're all born with it, we all share it, we all want it, and we all can and must get it. In later years, those students and students like them got the resources and supports they needed--books and accommodation and better technology and better-trained teachers, and they also got the time to learn in their own way, and every single one of them learned. They met our highest of expectations, and many of them went on to do great things. Whether it was the children I grew up tutoring or whether it was relatives and cousins, I was lucky enough to grow up with children who every single day were beating the odds. Witnessing those daily struggles and the tenacity and the courage necessary to overcome them shaped me. We have to have the highest of expectations for every child in every classroom across the country.

That's the understanding we bring to our work in reauthorizing federal laws impacting people with disabilities. Whether it's ESEA, IDEA, the Workforce Investment Act, or the Americans with Disabilities Act, please know that the Obama administration stands with you and that I will remain your champion, your advocate, and your servant. Please know that I will always challenge myself and my team to measure our collective success in terms of all children, not some children, and all people, not just some people. Equality and inclusion are at the heart of the American ideal. They represent our common hopes, our deepest aspirations, and our best values. So I thank you so much for your time tonight. I thank you even more for holding me and others accountable for our words and our actions, and most importantly, I thank you for the hard work you're doing every single day on behalf of America's children and adults with disabilities. Because of you, literally--literally--millions and millions of people with disabilities will reach their full potential, and therefore America will reach hers. Thank you so much and have a great evening.