DeLauro Urges Exception for Amity School Disability Funding
Washington, DC— Congresswoman Rosa DeLauro (CT-3) sent the following letter to Secretary of Education Arne Duncan today, calling for him to personally examine the funding situation at Regional School District 5 in Woodbridge, CT.
Regional School District 5 in Woodbridge, CT has been the focus of some controversy regarding an Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) provision that dictates the allocation of funding based on a school's student body proportionally according to race. Located in District 5, the Amity school at the center of this issue has a high percentage of Caucasian autistic students, and is therefore facing the unintended consequence of restricting the way the school can serve children with disabilities.
Congresswoman DeLauro said, "When it comes to Connecticut's Regional School District 5, we are talking about a school district that is 90% Caucasian with a high incidence of autism – we cannot help that. These are the kids that need our help. I believe that Amity should not be restricted in the way it uses IDEA funds – especially if it is using the resources where they are most needed."
The text of the letter is below.
March 18, 2010 The Honorable Arne Duncan, Secretary U.S. Department of Education 400 Maryland Avenue, SW Room 7W301 Washington, DC 20202-1510
Dear Secretary Duncan:
I am writing to you on behalf of the Regional School District 5 in Woodbridge, CT regarding a matter of grave concern and to seek your support.
As you may be aware, pursuant to Section 618(d) of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act (IDEA), state departments of education must collect and examine data to determine if significant disproportionality based on race and ethnicity is occurring in their local educational agencies (LEAs). As I understand it, the original purpose of this specific provision was to address racial and ethnic disparity in the identification of children with disabilities and to ensure that funding would be made available to analyze such data and implement corrective remedies where warranted.
Also, pursuant to Section 613(f), where such disproportionality exists, the state must direct the affected LEA to implement several actions, including the requirement to reserve 15 percent of its IDEA entitlement funds to provide comprehensive coordinated early intervening services (CEIS) for children in the LEA who have not been identified in need of special education, but who need additional academic and behavioral supports to succeed in a general environment. Such funds could also be used for professional development for teachers and other school staff to enable such personnel to deliver scientifically based academic instruction and behavioral interventions, including scientifically based literacy instruction, and, where appropriate, instruction on the use of adaptive and instructional software; and providing educational and behavioral evaluations, services and supports, including scientifically based literacy instruction.
While I am aware of the intent of the provision to address the over identification of students among racial or ethnic groups, I believe that recent studies and findings regarding the increasing numbers of students diagnosed with autism or other low incidence disabilities should warrant reconsideration of this specific provision to reserve 15 percent of the IDEA entitlement funds. I concur with the law that LEAs should be directed to conduct an assessment to determine and validate the over representation. However, I believe that once such assessments have been conducted and the data has been justified, the requirement to reserve the 15 percent should be waived, at least temporarily. When it comes to Connecticut's Regional School District 5, we are talking about a school district that is 90% Caucasian with a high incidence of autism – we cannot help that. These are the kids that need our help. I believe that Amity should not be restricted in the way it uses IDEA funds – especially if it is using the resources where they are most needed.
Furthermore, you should know that the House Report 108-77 which accompanied H.R. 1350, The Individuals with Disabilities Education of 2004 stated: "The Committee recognizes that the identification process requires individualized decisions that are appropriate for the individual child that may, when aggregated together, indicate a potential over-identification problem. The Committee does not intend to penalize local education agencies for making appropriate decisions for each individual child. The Committee encourages States to develop positive and proactive methods of dealing with this problem." Clearly, this shows congressional intent at the time Congress was considering the reauthorization of IDEA was not to penalize LEAs.
As such, I urge you to personally engage on this issue and review this matter as soon as possible, particularly in view of the need for increasing federal, state and local funds to adequately address the needs of our students with disabilities. I would be pleased to provide you with additional information regarding the specific circumstances in Woodbridge, CT., and I am certain that there are other local communities across the nation facing similar challenges due to these unintended consequences.
Thank you for your kind consideration of this request. I look forward to hearing from you.
Sincerely, Rosa L. DeLauro Member of Congress
CC: Mark K. McQuillan, Commissioner of Education