BILL ANALYSIS ------------------------------------------------------------ |SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | AB 1841| |Office of Senate Floor Analyses | | |1020 N Street, Suite 524 | | |(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | | |327-4478 | | ------------------------------------------------------------ Third Reading Bill No: AB 1841 Author: Buchanan (D) Amended: 6/3/10 in Senate Vote: 21 SENATE EDUCATION COMMITTEE : 6-0, 6/16/10 AYES: Romero, Huff, Emmerson, Hancock, Liu, Price NO VOTE RECORDED: Alquist, Simitian, Wyland SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE : 4-0, 6/22/10 AYES: Corbett, Harman, Hancock, Leno NO VOTE RECORDED: Walters ASSEMBLY FLOOR : 71-0, 4/12/10 - See last page for vote SUBJECT : Special education: parental consent SOURCE : Superintendent of Public Instruction DIGEST : This bill conforms state law to federal law by specifically prohibiting schools from initiating due process procedures against a parent of a student with special needs if the parent revokes consent for special education. ANALYSIS : Current Federal Law and Regulations The federal Individuals with Disabilities Education Act CONTINUED AB 1841 Page 2 (IDEA) requires that all children with disabilities be provided a free appropriate public education in the least restrictive environment, and sets forth the responsibilities of states and local education agencies. The IDEA was reauthorized in 2004 and its implementing federal regulations became effective in October 2006. Clarifying amendments to the regulations were subsequently adopted in December 2008. The revised federal regulations provide that "consent" means that: 1. The parent has been fully informed of all information relevant to the activity for which consent is sought, in his or her native language, or through another mode of communication. 2. The parent understands and agrees in writing to the carrying out of the activity and the consent describes that activity and lists the records (if any) that will be released and to whom. 3. The parent understands that the granting of consent is voluntary on the part of the parent and may be revoked at any time. If a parent revokes consent in writing after the child is initially provided special education and related services, the public agency is not required to amend the child's education records to remove any references to the child's receipt of special education and related services because of the revocation of consent. The federal regulations also require that parental revocation of consent for the continued provision of special education and related services to a child must be made in writing and that upon revocation of consent, a public agency: 1. May not continue to provide special education and related services but must provide prior written notice before ceasing the provision of special education and related services. 2. May not use procedural safeguards, including mediation CONTINUED AB 1841 Page 3 or due process, in order to obtain agreement or a ruling that the services may be provided to the child. 3. Will not be considered to be in violation of the requirement to make a free appropriate public education available to the child because of the failure to provide the child with further special education and related services. 4. Is not required to convene an individualized education program (IEP) team meeting or develop an IEP for the child for further provision of special education and related services. Current State Law 1. Requires a local education agency (LEA) to seek to obtain informed consent from the parent of a child prior to the provision of special education or related services. 2. Prohibits LEAs from providing special education or related services to a child if the parent fails to respond or refuses to consent to the initiation of special education or related services. 3. Prohibits LEAs from filing a due process complaint against a parent who fails to respond or refuses to consent to the initiation of special education and related services. 4. Applies both of the following if the parent refuses initial consent or fails to respond to a request to provide consent: A. The LEA shall not be considered to be in violation of the requirement to make free appropriate public education available to the child for failure to provide special education and related services for which the LEA requests consent. B. The LEA shall not be required to convene an IEP team meeting or develop an IEP for the child. CONTINUED AB 1841 Page 4 5. Requires LEAs to file a request for due process if the parent of a child with special needs refuses all services in the IEP after having consented to those services in the past. 6. Essentially mirrors federal regulations with respect to parental consent but is silent regarding the amendment of education records if parental consent is revoked. This bill conforms state law to federal law by prohibiting schools from initiating due process procedures against a parent of a student with special needs if the parent revokes consent for special education. Specifically, this bill: 1. Deletes the requirement that a LEA file a request for due process if a parent of a child with special needs revokes consent for all services in the IEP after having consented to those services in the past. 2. Prohibits a public agency from doing the following if a parent of a child with special needs submits a written revocation of his or her consent at any time subsequent to the initial provision of special education and related services to the child: A. Continue to provide special education and related services to the child, but is required to provide prior written notice to the child's parent before ceasing the provision of special education and related services. B. Use procedural safeguards, including mediation and due process complaint procedures, to obtain agreement or a ruling that the services may be provided to the child. 3. Deems a public agency to be in compliance with the requirement to make a free appropriate public education available to a child if the agency ceases to provide the child with further special education and related services. CONTINUED AB 1841 Page 5 4. Specifies that a public agency is not required to convene an IEP team meeting or develop an IEP for the child for further provision of special education. 5. Specifies that a public agency is not required to amend the education records of a child to remove any reference to the child's receipt of special education and services if the child's parent submits a written revocation of consent after the initial provision of special education and related services to the child. Prior Legislation AB 1663 (Evans), Chapter 454, Statutes of 2007, makes various revisions to state special education statutes to bring them into conformity with federal changes enacted through the 2004 reauthorization of IDEA and its implementing federal regulations. Passed the Senate Floor with a vote of 40-0 on September 11, 2007. AB 685 (Karnette), Chapter 56, Statutes of 2007, makes technical changes to several provisions of the Education Code and the Government Code regarding individuals with exceptional needs and special education to conform to updated federal regulations. Passed the Senate Floor with a vote of 38-0 on June 21, 2007. AB 1662 (Lieber), Chapter 653, Statutes of 2005, makes changes to state special education statutes to bring them into conformity with federal changes enacted through the 2004 reauthorization of the IDEA. Passed the Senate Floor with a vote of 38-0 on September 8, 2005. FISCAL EFFECT : Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: No Local: No SUPPORT : (Verified 6/23/10) Superintendent of Public Instruction (source) Association of California School Administrators California Association of Joint Powers Authorities California School Boards Association California Teachers Association Developmental Disabilities Area Board 10 CONTINUED AB 1841 Page 6 Disability Rights California Los Angeles County Office of Education San Francisco Unified School District Special Education Local Plan Area Administrators ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT : According to the author's office, "as a condition of receiving more than $1.2 billion in federal grant funds under the IDEA, California is required to comply with these new regulations. If the state's Education Code is not brought into compliance, the state could jeopardize its IDEA grant eligibility. If California is found noncompliant, the US Department of Education could sanction the California Department of Education, and reduce or withhold federal funds the state receives for special education services." ASSEMBLY FLOOR : AYES: Adams, Ammiano, Arambula, Beall, Bill Berryhill, Tom Berryhill, Blakeslee, Block, Blumenfield, Bradford, Brownley, Buchanan, Caballero, Charles Calderon, Carter, Chesbro, Conway, Cook, Coto, Davis, De La Torre, De Leon, DeVore, Emmerson, Eng, Feuer, Fletcher, Fong, Fuentes, Fuller, Furutani, Gaines, Galgiani, Garrick, Gilmore, Hagman, Hayashi, Hernandez, Hill, Huber, Huffman, Jeffries, Jones, Knight, Lieu, Logue, Bonnie Lowenthal, Ma, Mendoza, Miller, Monning, Nava, Nestande, Niello, Nielsen, V. Manuel Perez, Portantino, Ruskin, Salas, Saldana, Silva, Skinner, Solorio, Audra Strickland, Swanson, Torres, Torrico, Tran, Villines, Yamada, John A. Perez NO VOTE RECORDED: Anderson, Bass, Evans, Hall, Harkey, Norby, Smyth, Torlakson, Vacancy PQ:do 6/30/10 Senate Floor Analyses SUPPORT/OPPOSITION: SEE ABOVE **** END **** CONTINUED