In this final installment of LEA protocol, I present a scenario where you - as building Principal - legally must be there as LEA at a student's IEP meeting. You cannot send a surrogate, lest you expose yourself to legal action on the part of the student's parents.
In this scenario, "Matt" has an emotional disturbance, and his IEP calls for 100% self containment in a special education setting. Additional staff are needed to maintain the safety and welfare of students and staff. Matt's parents are asking for a functional behavioral assessment, a behavior intervention plan (BIP), individual psychotherapy, recreational therapy, parent training, and a personal assistant. In this case, it would be very inappropriate for a building-level counselor to be an LEA representative for this IEP. Matt's IEP requires a much greater level of supervision than does Meredith's (see yesterday's post), requires complete delivery of the general ed. curriculum in a fully segregated setting, and requires a great deal more resources which a building-level counselor cannot commit. In this case, the building Principal and the Director of Special Services should both be in attendance at the meeting, either of which could be designated as the LEA representative.
As you can see, each IEP requires very different levels of supervision, curricular knowledge, and resources. Case managers must carefully consider each of these criteria as they select an LEA for their IEP's.