|
**************************************************************************
VOR is the only national organization advocating
for a full range of
residential and support options for people with
mental retardation,
including Medicaid-certified Intermediate Care
Facilities for the Mentally
Retarded (ICFs/MR) and home and community-based
care. VOR supports choice.
***************************************************************************
--------------------------------------------
VOR Weekly E-Mail Update
October 20, 2006
--------------------------------------------
======================================================
1. ARC calls for Beatrice center to close
2. The high cost of special education - Families
say that inclusion will
leave autistic behind
3. Students with Mental Retardation Make Gains
in the general classroom,
University of Florida study finds
4. U.S. Issues New Rules on Schools and
Disability
======================================================
------------------------------------------------------------
1. ARC calls for Beatrice center to close
------------------------------------------------------------
Summary: Reportedly, only the Executive
Committee of The ARC of Nebraska,
and not the whole board, considered a position
regarding the future of
Beatrice Developmental Center.
By Nancy Hicks
The Lincoln Journal Star
Tuesday, Oct 10, 2006
A statewide advocacy group is calling for the
closing of the Beatrice State
Developmental Center and the resignation of all
top state Health and Human
Services System leaders.
The ARC of Nebraska's call for action is a
response to problems at the
center discovered during a recent federal
inspection, including the
potential abuse of restraints and mishandling of
abuse and neglect cases.
The state has until Oct. 26 to correct the
deficiencies.
Gov. Dave Heineman said Monday he sees no reason
to close the center, which
has the support of relatives and the local
community.
And he won't consider calling for the
resignation of Health and Human
Services leadership, a suggestion he called an
"overreaction."
"The governor has shown his willingness to make
changes where appropriate,"
said Aaron Sanderford, a spokesman for Heineman.
"And we will continue to
evaluate the situation."
Patty Smith, president of the ARC of Nebraska,
said the state needs a plan
to move people now from the center to local
communities, and to close the
institution in perhaps one or two years.
There are eight states and the District of
Columbia without any
institutions for people with mental retardation.
And nine more are moving
in that direction, she said.
The ARC, a support and advocacy organization
for people with developmental
disabilities and their families, supports
de-institutionalization or the
care of people in home communities and not in
larger state institutions.
But the governor believes the center serving
about 370 people, mostly
adults provides an important service for
families.
"The facility has the overwhelming support of
the families and the
community. We see no reason to change on that
point," Sanderford said.
The ARC of Nebraska was part of a lawsuit in the
1970s that led to most
people with mental retardation getting placed in
community programs.
But another group of parents with adult children
in the center opposed its
closing.
A settlement allowed the state to maintain the
Beatrice center.
Today, the center serves fewer than 400 people,
while about 4,000 receive
services through community programs. They
generally live in apartments,
group homes or their own homes.
The settlement gave parents and guardians a
choice, said Health and Human
Services spokeswoman Kathie Osterman.
"We believe that BSDC plays a valuable role and
has the support of family
and friends of people who receive those
services," she said.
The ARC of Nebraska also asked the governor to
set up an advisory group
independent of the Health and Human Services
System to monitor all
programs serving people with developmental
disabilities.
Its news release pointed to the recent closing
of Transfiguration, a
Lincoln company that provided care to about 130
people in Lincoln and
Omaha.
The company collapsed financially, even though
state regulations require
annual fiscal audits to ensure financial
stability, the news release points
out.
The state has a developmental disability
advisory committee, and Health and
Human Services leaders have asked that group to
appoint an ad hoc
subcommittee to work with the administration and
staff on the Beatrice
issues, Osterman said.
"Changes are under way, and we are putting a
plan in place so we can
monitor the situation long term," she said.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. The high cost of special education - Families
say that inclusion will
leave autistic behind
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Summary: The following article discusses the
need for a range of
educational options for children with
developmental disabilities, including
regular classroom and specialized schools
(public and private). For
additional discussion on the merits of full
inclusion v. full choice, visit
http://www.vor.net/Don't%20take%20sides.htm.
Additional resources are
available at
http://www.vor.net (link:
Activities/Resources - scroll down
to "Special Education" section).
Monday, October 09, 2006
By John Mooney
© 2006 The Star Ledger
Ten years ago, Brian and Sandy Epstein made a
desperate cross-country move
to New Jersey in a bid for improved schooling
for their autistic son,
Brandon.
It wasn't West Windsor's own special-education
program, however, that
brought the family from Oregon. Rather, it was
the specialized schools
nearby where they knew their son would be sent.
Brandon, 15, now attends Academy Learning Center
in Monroe, a 10-acre
campus for 140 autistic and multiply challenged
children operated by the
Middlesex County Educational Services
Commission. And like the other
students, his hefty tuition is paid by the local
district.
"We were down to our last $1,000 and said we
couldn't do it any more (in
Oregon), so we took Brandon to the best program
that existed for him," said
Brian Epstein, a Manhattan clothing designer.
"We feel so lucky to live in New Jersey," the
father said, choking up. "We
feel so blessed that we live here."
The Epsteins reflect a heart-wrenching side in
New Jersey's protracted
public conversation over where to educate
children with disabilities -- an
already volatile debate that is being
exacerbated as state lawmakers take a
hard look at education costs.
With nearly 200 private and public specialized
schools to choose from, New
Jersey has 20,000 students in the separate
settings, close to 9 percent of
its special-education population and by far the
nation's highest rate. This
despite years of concerted effort and state
mandates designed to bring
students back to local districts, where they
would be educated alongside
nonspecial-education students.
Now, the state is stepping up the pressure on
several fronts, including a
pledge to the federal government to bring 4,000
children into in-district
programs by 2010. Gov. Jon Corzine included
nearly $20 million in the state
budget that districts could use to initiate
programs meant to keep
special-education students in their local
schools.
The topic also is being raised as Corzine and
lawmakers grapple with
school-funding reform. Last year, according to
data provided a state
advisory committee over the summer, more than
$850 million was spent on
tuition for out-of-district placements -- more
than a quarter of the $3.3
billion spent on special education overall.
"If we can do a better job at keeping kids
within their districts, it's
going to keep our costs down," said state Sen.
John Adler (D-Camden), who
co-chairs a special school-funding panel that
has spent two hearings so far
on special education alone.
But with federal and state law dictating each
disabled child's education be
individually determined, families like the
Epsteins are testament to the
challenge in telling parents what is best for
their child -- especially
when the parents feel they know otherwise.
The emotion was on display last month when
parents filled a New Brunswick
hearing room to press Middlesex County
freeholders to move ahead with a new
special-education school in Sayreville and the
renovation and expansion of
another in Piscataway.
One tearful parent after another spoke of the
better care and attention
their children received in separate schools
within the Middlesex County
system. And they had harsh words for traditional
public schools.
"Integration, while looking great on paper, we
didn't see it," said Dawn
Fellerman of Piscataway, who has an autistic
child now in a Middlesex
program. "Children like my son will never fit
into an integrated program."
The freeholders would go on to unanimously
approve the $40 million project,
but not before they heard some weighty
opposition.
In one of his first forays into public policy
debate, state Public Advocate
Ronald Chen wrote the freeholders that such
placements fly in the face of
research and law that supports the "least
restrictive environment" for
children in special education.
"Separate is not equal, and special education
cannot continue to be viewed
as a separate system of educational care," Chen
wrote.
The Epsteins were in the crowd, Brandon sitting
between his parents and
needing his mother's frequent touch to keep him
from bounding out of his
seat. The family hugged when the vote was
counted.
The father afterward said inclusion might be
appropriate for many children,
just not his. Brandon would remain seated about
a minute, his father said,
even with a constant aide, before getting up and
disrupting the class. It
took Brandon five years to learn to hold a
pencil, let alone write a
letter.
"They are trying to put us all in the same box
(of inclusion), when our son
doesn't fit in that box," Epstein said.
It's not hard to see the attraction of the
Academy Learning Center, a
half-hour bus ride for Brandon every day. In a
modern, sun-filled building
with almost as many staff as students, there are
full therapy rooms and a
slew of vocational and life-skills programs. A
row of elaborate wheelchairs
lines one wall.
The school's program costs taxpayers between
$33,000 and $36,000 per
student, depending on the disability.
In a "daily living" class, four teachers and
aides worked with a dozen boys
and girls with cognitive disabilities in
cleaning up after themselves, at
one point tossing socks and hangers onto the
floor for the students to pick
up.
"A number of these kids could do well (in their
home schools), no doubt,"
said Eric Solberg, the school's principal. "We
have several who do go back
on a part-time basis. But many of their families
also feel their districts
wouldn't meet the needs in the same way we can.
... Right now there is a
large demand for our services."
Dozens of local districts have programs for more
severely disabled
children, both in the mainstream classrooms and
in separate specialized
programs within the school. But most everyone in
the debate concedes more
could be done.
At one legislative hearing last week on special
education, one of
inclusion's top advocates didn't blame parents
for advocating special
schools.
"It's much easier to put your child on a bus and
send them to a place that
at least welcomes them, even if it means that
they spend two hours a day on
a bus and never see a child without a
disability," said Diana Autin,
co-director of State Parent Advocacy Network. "
"But few parents would choose to put their
children on a bus for that long
ride if they felt that their local school has
the knowledge, expertise and
desire to effectively educate their child," she
said.
State efforts to rein in the numbers have had
limited effect. Two years
ago, the state put a moratorium on new separate
schools to give it time to
better review the needs of districts and
families.
A tougher application process for new schools
emerged, although another six
private schools that previously were approved
opened in the last two years,
according to the state. Four new public
programs, including the two in
Middlesex, also have been approved.
Now the state will crack down through a tougher
monitoring process that
will red-flag school districts with high rates
of out-of-district
placements.
State officials agree some students are best
served in separate settings,
but not to the degree they are seeing.
"If we can get some of these kids back in the
district, we can open up
space in these schools for those who really need
them," said Barbara
Gantwerk, the acting state assistant
commissioner overseeing special
education.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. Students with Mental Retardation Make Gains
in the general classroom,
University of Florida study finds
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Summary: This article makes the case for
inclusion, although even with this
research, TOTAL inclusion is not being
suggested.
University of Florida News
http://news.ufl.edu/2006/08/08/mainstream/
GAINESVILLE, Fla. Students with mental
retardation are far more likely to
be educated alongside typical students than they
were 20 years ago, a
University of Florida study has found.
However, the trend once known as "mainstreaming"
widely considered the best
option for such students appears to have
stalled in some parts of the
country, the study's authors report. And a
student's geographic location,
rather than the severity of his disability,
often determines how he will
spend his school days, the researchers say.
"We've known for a long time that students with
MR (mental retardation) are
better off educationally if they can spend at
least part of the day in a
typical classroom," said James McLeskey, chair
of special education in UF's
College of Education and an author of the study.
"We've found that there
are still lot of students who could be included
in the general classroom
but aren't included."
Before the mid-1970s, most children with mental
retardation were completely
segregated from other children in the school
system, if they were formally
educated at all. By the late 1960s, educators
had assembled a large body of
research to show that children with mental
retardation did indeed perform
much better when schooled, at least part-time,
among the general student
population. That research led Congress to pass a
1975 law requiring a more
inclusive environment for students with mental
retardation.
Surveys in the 1980s and early 1990s showed that
schools had made little
progress toward implementing that mandate. In an
article published in the
spring 2006 issue of the journal Exceptional
Children, UF researchers
including doctoral candidates Pam Williamson,
David Hoppey and Tarcha Rentz
revisited the
question, taking a comprehensive look at
placement rates for students with
mental retardation in all 50 states and the
District of Columbia during the
1990s. They found some very good news.
"Inclusion seems to have genuinely caught on in
the 1990s," said
Williamson, the lead author of the study. "By
the end of the decade, a
student with MR was almost twice as likely to be
educated in the general
classroom as a similar student the beginning of
the decade."
In 1990, almost three-fourths of students with
MR were educated separately
from their typical peers, learning in separate
classrooms or entire schools
dedicated to children with mental retardation.
By 2000, only slightly more
than half of students with MR were educated
separately.
Still, a handful of states Idaho, Kansas,
Minnesota, New Hampshire, North
Dakota, Oregon, South Dakota and Vermont
accounted for much of the gain
seen nationwide, with many other states marking
little or no progress.
A simple move across state lines, the
researchers say, can have a major
impact on a child's educational career. Various
states have widely
different policies on who can be identified with
mental retardation, and
how they are educated. Some states identify
mental retardation in as few as
three out of every 1,000 students; others
identify as many as 30 students
per 1,000. Demographically similar states such
as Alabama and Mississippi
differ widely in their reported rates of mental
retardation suggesting the
differences are due to policy, not environmental
factors.
"For a student with mental retardation,
geographic location is possibly the
strongest predictor of the student's future
educational setting,"
Williamson said.
Inclusion can also have a beneficial effect for
students already in the
general classroom. When typical students attend
school with classmates who
have MR, the researchers say, they learn
leadership skills and become more
tolerant. They even score higher, as a group, on
standardized tests.
In the current era of high-stakes testing, that
effect could work to the
benefit of students with MR. Under past school
accountability rules, many
states did not count the scores of students in
MR-only classes when
conducting statewide achievement tests an
incentive to administrators to
keep students with mental retardation out of the
general classroom.
Under the No Child Left Behind Act, however,
schools must report test
scores of all students, including those in
separate special education
classes.
"All these students count now, and schools have
an incentive to improve
their scores," McLeskey said. "Inclusion seems
to be the best way to do
that."
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
4. U.S. Issues New Rules on Schools and
Disability
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
By Diana Jean Schemo
The New York Times
August 4, 2006
WASHINGTON, D.C. For more than 25 years, federal
law had required that
schools nationwide identify children as learning
disabled by comparing
their scores on intelligence tests with their
academic achievement. This
meant that many students had to wait until third
or fourth grade to get the
special education help they needed.
In regulations issued today after changes to the
law, the federal Education
Department said states could not require school
districts to rely on that
method, allowing districts to find other ways to
determine which children
are eligible for extra help.
It was the final step in the federal
government's repudiation of the old
approach, which had come under severe criticism
from advocates for children
with disabilities, testing experts and
eventually federal officials
themselves. Advocates for those children
applauded the change.
"If you talk to principals and special ed
directors, there is pent-up
demand for better ways to serve struggling kids
than waiting until they
crash and burn in third and fourth grade," said
James H. Wendorf, executive
director of the National Center for Learning
Disabilities.
The new rules also require schools to alert
parents as they begin exploring
whether children may need special education,
another change that won praise
from advocates for children with disabilities.
The regulations come after Congress updated laws
covering special education
for some six million schoolchildren nationwide
in late 2004.
Comparing intelligence tests with academic
achievement, known as the
discrepancy model, came under intense criticism
in the debates over the law
and over special education.
Federal officials and advocates for children
with disabilities contended
that the practice of waiting for children to
fall behind on tests in third
or fourth grade before getting them extra help
consigned them to failure,
and opened the way for the disproportionate
numbers of poor and minority
children to be labeled as needing special
education. The 2004 law abandoned
reliance on that approach. And the new
regulations favor alternative
methods of identifying children who need
services, like evaluating the
response of struggling children to extra help
before the third grade.
The 2004 law also streamlined procedures and
reduced the paperwork involved
in providing children special education
services, and relaxed burdens on
schools when children with disabilities had
behavioral problems.
A draft of the regulations published in June
2005 prompted an outpouring of
5,500 letters and comments to the Education
Department from advocates for
children with disabilities, as well as parents,
teachers' unions, and
state, district and local education officials.
The department posted the final regulations on
its Web site today, along
with answers to each of the comments it
received.
The final regulations will be published in the
Federal Register on Aug. 14,
and will take effect 60 days later.
In unveiling the new rules, Education Secretary
Margaret Spellings said her
priority was "that we not lose our vigilance for
educational attainment for
every child."
Advocates for children with disabilities said
they were disappointed that
the regulations did not address some problems
they saw in the 2004 federal
law.
For example, the law says that instead of
reviewing each disabled child's
educational plan every year automatically,
schools could review them only
once every three years, provided parents agree
to the change. The
regulations do not help ensure parents are
properly notified, advocates
said.
"But who is going to make sure that parents now
know what they're giving up
if they agree to that?" said Ricki Sabia,
associate director of the
National Down Syndrome Society Policy Center.
"The department could have
made clear what constitutes that agreement."
------------------------------------------------------------
Tamie Hopp
REFERRAL/MEMBERSHIP/CONTRIBUTION FORM
THREE EASY WAYS TO SUPPORT VOR > REFER,
CONTRIBUTE OR JOIN
THANK YOU FOR YOUR SUPPORT!
TO JOIN OR CONTRIBUTE: $25 per individual, $150
per family organization, or
$200 per provider/professional organization.
Extra donations are welcome!
You may pay by credit card or check.
TO REFER SOMEONE TO VOR: Use the form below,
including the additional
sections for referrals.
Mail the completed form (if joining or
contributing) with payment to:
Voice of the Retarded
5005 Newport Drive, Suite 108
Rolling Meadows, IL 60008
847-253-6054 fax (for referrals or credit card
payments)
vor@compuserve.com (for referrals or credit
card payments)
FOR REFERRALS: ____ The contact information
provided is for someone I
think would consider membership with VOR.
FOR REFERRALS: _____ You may use my name in
any correspondence with this
individual. My name is ________________________.
____________________________________________
Name
_____________________________________________
Address (if paying by credit card, use billing
address). All forms must
include complete address including zip code)
_____________________________________________
City St Zip
_____________________________________________
Phone Fax
_____________________________________________
E-Mail
_________________________________________________
Family/Professional Organization Affiliation (if
applicable)
VOR now accepts Master Card and Visa. If paying
by credit card, please
provide the following information:
Amount to charge to card:
___$1,000 ___$500 ___$250 ___$150 ___$50
___$25 $_____ Other amount
_____ Master Card
_____ Visa
Card Number: ___________________________________
Expiration Date:
__________________________________
Cardholder's Signature:
___________________________
|
