UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION OFFICE FOR CML RIGHTS

Dr. Stephen F. Murley Superintendent

500 WEST MADISON ST., SUITE 1475 CIDCAGO, IL 60661-4544

July 7, 2017

Iowa City Community School District 1725 North Dodge Street Iowa City, Iowa 52245

Re: OCR Case #05-10-5004

Dear Dr. Murley:

REGIONV ILLINOIS INDIANA IOWA MINNESOTA NORTH DAKOTA WISCONSIN

On September 10, 2013, the Iowa City Community School District (District) signed a Settlement Agreement (Agreement) to resolve the above-referenced compliance review conducted by the U.S. Department of Education (Department), Office for Civil Rights (OCR), and to ensure its compliance with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000d-2000d-7, and its implementing regulation at 34 C.F.R. Part 100, which prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color, or national origin by recipients of Federal financial assistance from the Department; Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, 29 U.S.C. § 794, and its implementing regulation at 34 C.F .R. Part 104, which prohibits discrimination on the basis of disability in programs or activities operated by recipients of Federal financial assistance; and Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, 42 U.S.C. § 12131 - 12134, and its implementing regulation at 28 C.F.R. Part 35, which prohibits discrimination on the basis of disability by public entities.

OCR received reports from the District on February 14, 2017, and during an on-site visit on March 28-30, 2017. OCR also interviewed personnel from the District office and seven District schools during the March 2017 on-site. This letter addresses information contained in the February and March reports and obtained in on-site interviews.

Item #1 of the Agreement required the District to hire an expert with expertise in addressing the overrepresentation of minority st:udents in special education to review the District's procedures for screening, identification, evaluation and placement of students with regard to special education and/or the provision of related aids and services; to examine the root cause(s) of the racial disparity in the overrepresentation of minority students in special education; and to make recommendations as to what measures the District should take to ensure that it is making appropriate determinations as to its students' eligibility for special education and/or related aids and services and to address the overrepresentation of minorities in special education and the root causes of this overrepresentation.

The District documented to OCR in December 2013 that it hired an expert and that the expert recommended that the District develop a communication plan for teachers, devote more time to

The Department of Education's mission is to promote student achievement and preparation for global competitiveness by fostering educational excellence and ensuring equal access.

www.ed.gov

Page 2 - Dr. Murley

professional development, ensure more effective implementation of the Response to Intervention (RTI) model, consider adopting a new tool for universal screening, and research supplemental reading programs.

In previous reports, the District indicated that in implementing the recommendations, it provided updates at administrative meetings that were shared at building-level faculty meetings, it updated the progress chart on the District's website, it provided a question and answer session at Board meetings, and it finalized and shared the Multi-Tiered System of Supports (MTSS) handbook; the District indicated that MTSS is the state's term for RTI. The District also indicated that the District curriculum plan focused on supporting reading strategies for struggling learners and that it provided professional development to District administrators and used a ''train the trainer" model to share information with building-level staff, that it differentiated the professional development plan, and that District administrators met with building administrators to identify interventions to meet specific needs at schools. The District also reported that educational videos were shown to staff members and that all District administrators attended a two-day cultural competency training. The District further indicated that elementary-level administrators and instructional coaches were trained in the "Short-Cycle Data Analysis Protocol" and that this protocol was implemented in each building and said that instructional design strategists were placed in each building. The District also indicated that it began use of the state-recommended screener for literacy.

During the on-site, as described in more detail below, testimony confirmed that the District has put in place the MTSS system across the District, has provided professional development to staff, has placed instructional design strategists in each building, and has put in place the state­recommended screener for literacy.

Based on the information provided in the reports and during the on-site, OCR has determined that the District has met the terms ofltem # 1 of the Agreement.

Item #2 of the Agreement required the District to develop a plan to expand its universal screening process to identify students in need of extra assistance as early as possible in their academic careers and early in each school year, on an annual basis, with a goal of ensuring that no students are inappropriately referred for ·a special education evaluation. Item #3 of the Agreement required the District to implement the plan referenced at item #2 and other screening improvements identified by the expert. ·

OCR notified the District in January 2014 that it had met the terms ofltem #2 of the Agreement. In previous reports, the District indicated that it had in place a universal screening system for reading and math for grades K-6 and also used a behavior screener. The District reported that data is analyzed by grade level teams in each building. The District also indicated that at the secondary level, students were identified as at-risk for failure based on indicators such as attendance, grades, disciplinary referrals, and standardized test scores.

During OCR's March 2017 on-site, testimony indicated that the District is using the state-wide approved literacy screener called Formative Assessment for Students and Teachers (FAST); the

Page 3 - Dr. Murley

District administers FAST three times each school year to measure growth. Students who fall below benchmarks on FAST once are placed on a list for progress monitoring and students who fall below benchmarks on FAST on a second occasion have interventions initiated. In addition, testimony indicated that the District currently does screening in math across the District, although the District is researching whether a different math screener would be superior and could be used to replace the one currently in place.

Based on the information provided in the reports and during the on-site, OCR has determined that the District has met the terms· ofltem #3 of the Agreement.

Item #4 of the Agreement required the District to ensure that every school in the District has implemented a systematic, team-based means of providing intervention strategies for students experiencing academic or behavior difficulties and to develop written procedures to be provided to all schools.

In previous reports, the District provided copies of its MTSS implementation plans for elementary and secondary levels. The plans stated that MTSS is "a process by which schools use data to identify the academic and behavioral supports each and every student needs to be successful in school and leave school ready for life." The plans listed three tiers: universal instruction, provided to all students using whole and small group instruction; targeted instruction, provided to approximately 5-15% of students using small group instruction; and intensive instruction, provided to approximately 1-5% of students using very small group or individual instruction. The plans identified Professional Learning Community (PLC) teams, which are grade-level based teams, and Student Support Teams as means by which students may be identified for targeted or intensive instruction.

During the on-site, OCR interviewed instructional design strategists and others who coordinate the MTSS process at their schools; while the process differs for schools at different levels, all schools have in place a systematic, team-based means of providing intervention strategies that includes a process to monitor the success of interventions, adjust the interventions as needed, and determine whether additional steps are needed.

Based on the information·provided in the reports and during the on-site, OCR has determined that the District has met the terms ofltem #4 of the Agreement.

Item #5 of the Agreement required the District to review and revise its materials regarding intervention strategies distributed to District personnel, parents/guardians, students, and other stakeholders to whom the District ordinarily distributes copies of such materials, in both hard copy and online (if such materials are posted online ), to reflect any changes made pursuant to Item #4. In addition, Item #5 required the materials to clarify how parents could request intervention strategies prior to referral for a special education evaluation and to state that the District's intervention strategies were not a substitute for, and should not delay the timely and appropriate evaluations and/or special education services. The item required the District to distribute copies of the materials to District personnel, parents/guardians, students, and other stakeholders to whom the District ordinarily distributes copies of such materials.

Page 4 - Dr. Murley

During the on-site, staff indicated that all parents of students who go through the MTSS process are involved in the process and that parents are aware of various intervention options at schools. In addition, the District has posted on its website a description of the MTSS process and copies of elementary and secondary MTSS handbooks. 1

Based on the information provided during the on-site and located on the District's website, OCR has determined that the District has met the terms ofltem #5 of the Agreement.

OCR notified the District in October 2016 that it met the terms ofltem #6 of the Agreement.

Item #7 of the Agreement required the District to provide District-wide training to all members of each school's building-level team on the intervention process and on intervention strategies for students. The training was required to address the identification of possible non-disability related causes of academic or behavior deficits, and the provision of appropriate regular education interventions and behavior management techniques that could be implemented in the regular education classroom to address these deficits. Item #8 of the Agreement required the District to provide all teachers with training on the building-level teams.

In previous reports to OCR, the District provided links to a video of professional development on the topics of building-level teams and the processes surrounding student referral to those teams. The link was accompanied by a list of personnel who viewed the video. The video referenced the structure of the teams, how students are identified for referral to the team at both the elementary and secondary levels, and the steps the team would take in considering individual students.

In its February 14, 2017, report to OCR, the District provided a link to a training video, which covered the screening and MTSS processes, as well as the Positive Behavior Interventions and Strategies used in the District. During the on-site, staff members confirmed that they had been required to view the training videos the District has provided to OCR. In addition, staff members indicated that instructional design strategists provide additional information as needed about the processes.

Based on the information provided in the reports and during the on-site, OCR.has determined that the District has met the terms ofltems #7 and #8 of the Agreement.

OCR notified the District in June 2014 that it met the terms of Item #9 of the Agreement.

Item #10 of the Agreement required the District to review the most recent evaluation of all students in special education in order to assess whether the student was determined eligible for special education based on the published criteria, including whether the student was determined eligible based on multiple factors, whether the student showed a sufficient discrepancy from peers or expectations to justify eligibility for special education, and whether the team properly ruled out all exclusionary factors in finding the student eligible for special education. The item required the District, for any student who the review revealed may not have met special

1 https://www.iowacityschools.org/Page/248

Page 5 - Dr. Murley

education eligibility criteria, to immediately commence a re-evaluation to determine whether the student was eligible for special education. The item further required the District, for any students who the review determined were improperly found eligible for special education, to provide all necessary compensatory and/or remedial services to address any deficits resulting from the improper placement.

The District previously reported that it completed 728 reevaluations in its implementation of this item. Of the 728 students who received reevaluations, 87 students, including 24 African American students, were exited from special education because they were determined to be ineligible.

OCR previously notified the District that it had satisfied the requirements of Item # 10 to review evaluations and conduct re-evaluations, but reqµested that the District submit a report concerning the implementation of compensatory services for the 87 students who were exited from special education.

In the report provided during the on-site, the District indicated that it determined compensatory services were appropriate for three exited students who are in high school~ but that the other exited students were not determined to be in need of such services, as they had been provided the necessary core instruction even before being exited from special education. The District reported that it offered compensatory services to the families of the three identified students, and that all declined the offer.

Based on the above, OCR has determined that the District has met the terms ofltem #10 of the Agreement.

OCR notified the District in October 2016 that it met the terms of Items #11 and #12 of the Agreement.

Item #13 of the Agreement required the District to analyze data related to teacher referrals of elementary school students to the building-level team, to determine whether students of all races were treated equitably in this regard. This item required the District to determine whether African _ American students were referred by any particular teacher at a disproportionate rate when compared to their representation in that teacher's classroom. The District was also to determine whether over-referral by a particular teacher was based on race, and to take appropriate actions to address any noted problems.

In previous reports to OCR, the District provided data for each elementary school teacher showing the teacher's school and grade level, the number of students enrolled by race in the teacher's classroom, and the number of students referred to the team by the teacher, by race. The District also included an analysis that concluded that some teachers had referred African American students at a _disproportionate rate as compared to students of other races. The District also noted that African American students were referred for the same academic or behavioral concerns as other races.

Page 6 - Dr. Murley

During the on-site, District personnel explained that the decision to refer a student is no longer made by an individual teacher, but is now made by PLC teams; therefore, data regarding students from a particular classroom referred is not a reflection of actions of the teacher in that classroom.

Based on the information provided in the reports and during the on-site, OCR has determined that the District has met the terms of Item # 13 of the Agreement.

Item #14 of the Agreement required the District to analyze data related to the provision ofteam­prescribed interventions, to determine whether students of all races were treated equitably in this regard. This item also required the District to determine whether all interventions prescribed by the team to each student were provided, whether teams met timeframes for meeting to determine the effectiveness of team-prescribed interventions, and whether teams were consistent in determinations made regarding whether additional interventions were necessary or whether a referral for special education evaluation was necessary.

In previous reports, the District reported its analysis of interventions provided, as well as whether teams met timeframes for meeting in order to determine the effectiveness of team-prescribed interventions and an analysis of whether teams were consistent in determining whether additional interventions or referrals for special education were necessary for each student. The District reported that it believed that teams met timeframes for evaluating effectiveness of interventions.

During the on-site, testimony revealed that the District's system in place has resulted in equitable provision of interventions to students of all races and to timely monitoring of the effectiveness of the interventions.

Based on the information provided in the reports and during the on-site, OCR has determined that the District has met the terms of Item # 14 of the Agreement.

The District provided information to OCR that showed that the proportion of students in the District enrolled in special education, as well as the disparity between the proportion of students enrolled in the District who are African American and the proportion of students in special education who are African American, have decreased in the years since OCR began its review.

OCR has determined that the District has fulfilled the terms of the Agreement and is in compliance with Title VI, 42 U.S.C. § 2000d-2000d-7, and its implementing regulation, at 34 C.F.R. Part 100, pertaining to the issued raised in this compliance review. Accordingly, OCR is closing its monitoring of this case effective the date of this letter.

This letter sets forth OCR's determination in an individual OCR case. This letter is not a formal statement of OCR policy and should not be relied upon, cited, or construed as such. OCR' s formal policy statements are approved by a duly authorized OCR official and made available to the public.

Page 7-Dr. Murley

Thank you for the cooperation extended to OCR in this review and the monitoring of the agreement. If you have any questions regarding our monitoring, please feel free to contact me at (312) 730-1611 or by e-mail at Jeffrey.Turnbull@ed.gov.

cc: Ms. Amy Kortemeyer Mr. Matt Degner

cerely,

W/