Meeting Attendance & Excusal

Schools are obligated to:

• Notify parents of the meeting early enough to ensure that one or both of the parents have an opportunity to attend, 

• Schedule the meeting at a mutually agreed on time and place, and 

• Take whatever action is necessary to ensure that the parent understands the proceedings of the meeting, including arranging for an interpreter for parents with deafness or whose native language is other than English. 

A common accommodation is arranging for one or more parents to attend the IEP meeting remotely via phone or videoconferencing.

This applies if the student is, or may be, participating in the general education environment. For students participating in self-contained federal setting 3 or setting 4 programs, a general education teacher is a required team member only if the team is considering a proposal of participation in the general education environment.

Best Practice v. Minimal Compliance

To meet minimal compliance requirements, a single general education teacher must be invited to the meeting (and participate in full unless agreed to in writing). If more than one general education teacher is responsible for implementing the student's IEP (very common in secondary buildings), the federal register commentary on IDEA 2004 indicates that districts have the option of designating a single teacher to attend the meeting and that they should consider the best interest of the student when making this decision. Some secondary buildings in SCRED have developed tools for collecting input from multiple general education teachers prior to the IEP meeting when only a single teacher will actually attend (for examples, see the section below on excusing required team members). 

Case managers should consider the needs of the student and any concerns expressed by parents when determining how many general education teachers to invite. For example, for a student with a complex Behavior Support Plan, attendance by multiple teachers is beneficial because it helps everyone get on the same page about how the plan should be implemented across classrooms.

Team Member Role

General education teachers speak to grade-level expectations and the student's areas of relative strength and weakness. This information contributes directly to making decisions about what types of supplementary aids and services (e.g., accommodations, modifications, assistive technology, or paraprofessional support) the student may need to be successful in the general education setting and achieve their IEP goals.

Best Practice v. Minimal Compliance

To meet minimal compliance requirements, a single special education teacher or service provider must be invited to the meeting (and participate in full unless agreed to in writing). During state file review, auditors will check that the IEP team included at least one special education teacher or service provider. If none have signed on the Record of Team Meeting, the auditor will check for a written agreement and written input from an absent team member in this role. 

To meet the standard of best practice, the case manager would invite all individuals responsible for providing specialized instruction to the student. For example, if a student is receiving specialized instruction in math, reading, and social skills from three different service providers, all would be invited and attend the IEP meeting.

Licensure Requirements

In Minnesota, a teacher who is licensed in the student’s disability area must be part of the student’s IEP team. Ideally, the student's case manager is licensed in the student's disability area, but when this is not the case, an additional team member who is licensed must participate in the team meetings. The licensed teacher must provide consultation and indirect services to any general and/or special education teachers providing instruction to the student, per Minnesota Rules 3525.0210 and 3525.2350.

Each SCRED member district maintains a District Licensing Team Grid to inform case managers regarding who in the district is licensed in each disability area. Click on your district's link and refer the table to determine licensure.

When the case manager is preparing the Notice/Record of Team Meeting form, any individual filling the role described above should be listed with their licensure (e.g., "Licensed ASD Teacher" or whichever licensure/category is relevant to their involvement in the meeting).

Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD): Specifically for students under the ASD category, there are several options for including a licensed team member:

• Licensed ASD teacher, licensed at the age/grade level of the student. 

• Licensed academic and behavior strategist (ABS) teacher for students in K-12, with a range of mild to moderate needs, 

• Licensed early childhood special education (ECSE) teacher for children from birth through age six.

OHD, TBI, & D/B: There are three Minnesota disabilities which currently do not have Minnesota teacher licensure. These are Deaf/Blind, Traumatic Brain Injury, and Other Health Disabilities. In these cases the federal standard of, "a teacher knowledgeable about the student's disability" will be utilized. The category Severely Multiply Impaired also does not have licensure but typically one of the disabilities in this cluster has Minnesota licensure.

IDEA defines this individual as someone who is "qualified to provide or supervise the provision of specially designed instruction to meet the unique needs of students with disabilities, is knowledgeable about the general curriculum, and is knowledgeable about the availability of resources of the district." 

Per MDE, additional requirements regarding the individual filling this role include: (1) they cannot be the student's teacher (in any way) and (2) they must have the authority to commit district resources.

Building administrators typically fill this role, but they may also designate individuals in their building who meet the qualification. If a building administrator is unavailable, School Psychologists typically function as the administrative representative. For information regarding who has been designated in your building, contact your building administrator or School Psychologist.

For Shared Setting IV Programs: Resident District Representative

If a student is placed out-of-district in a shared program (i.e., CLEC, Vision, PCTP, LWC), legally a representative from the student’s resident district must be included on the Notice of Team Meeting for IEP meetings. However, they are not required to attend the meeting and the IEP team does not need to follow the formal excusal process if the resident district representative is absent (provided there is still someone at the meeting filling the normal required role of administrative representative). In most cases, the district representative would be the building principal in the student’s resident district school, but in some cases the principal will delegate this to a different staff person. 

In cases where the student has been open enrolled in the district where the shared program is located (e.g., a student's resident district is Chisago Lakes, but they open enroll in North Branch and then begin attending the LWC), the IEP team does not have to invite a representative from their resident district. The key difference here is between district placement and open enrollment.

Someone who is already attending the meeting in another legal role can also fill this role. Evaluation reports must be developed by a multi-disciplinary team, meaning that a single special education teacher (or any individual) cannot complete the entire evaluation themselves. In many cases, the training of the evaluators does not overlap, and it is clear that multiple team members must be invited so that each can speak to the area of the evaluation report that they are qualified to interpret. For example, a school psychologist would need to be invited to the meeting to interpret the results of a BASC rating form because no other member of the team is trained to interpret those results.

Determinations regarding this role can be difficult, however, and this is most common when multiple evaluators are each trained to complete a component of the evaluation. For example, a special education teacher might complete a majority of the components of an evaluation for an OHD student, and a school psychologist might complete an observation to fulfill the multi-disciplinary team requirement. The special education teacher and the school psychologist are both qualified to interpret the OHD observation, and thus the school psychologist would not necessarily be considered a required team member in this case.

When making decisions about who and who not to invite, the case manager should communicate with the team member(s) in question and cooperatively determine whether or not the case manager is qualified to interpret the components of the evaluation report those individuals completed.

School Nurse Attendance

If a School Nurse is a member of the evaluation team and completes a health/physical assessment to rule out any health conditions that may impact educational progress (i.e., health is ruled out as a contributing factor), then the nurse is not required to attend the meeting, as there would be no need to interpret this information for the purposes of IEP planning. The nurse is still responsible for writing up and summarizing evaluation results regarding health/physical status.

Case Examples

Example 1: A school psychologist completes observations for an EBD re-evaluation. The student is making some progress on current IEP goals related to social, emotional, and/or behavioral functioning.

• The school psychologist would not be a required team member, as an observation could be interpreted by another team member.

• Consideration: EBD is a disability stemming from needs in the areas of mental health and behavior. School psychologists have unique training, perspective, and expertise in this area. Additionally, a re-evaluation is a unique opportunity in the special education process for IEP teams to determine what is working and what is not working, based on a comprehensive look at the student. Therefore, unless the student is making adequate or above progress, it is likely the school psychologist could have some ideas or recommendations for the team to consider.

Example 2: A school nurse completes a health/physical assessment. The student is not taking any medications at school or at home and no concerns were identified from the parent(s) or other team members regarding the student’s health. 

• The school nurse is not a required team member.

• Consideration: If concerns are noted by the parent(s) or other team members, the school nurse should attend the meeting.

Example 3: A school psychologist completes observations for an SLD re-evaluation.

• The school psych is not a required team member for the IEP meeting.

The student is a required team member only if the team will consider post-secondary goals and transition services. If the transition-age student does not attend the meeting, the school must find other ways to make sure that the student’s desires and interests are considered. 

As students get older, it is a good idea to encourage them to take a more active role in the IEP team. This allows them to have a strong voice in their own education and can teach them a great deal about self-advocacy and self-determination. Transition-aged children may even lead the IEP meeting.

If there is an agency other than the school providing postsecondary transition services (e.g., vocational rehabilitation, the county, etc.), they are required to be invited to the meeting and listed on Notice of Team Meeting form. However, the IEP team does not need to follow the formal excusal process if the agency representative is absent.

Per IDEA, the school must document “attempts” to hold the meeting with parents in attendance, which implies that a minimum of two attempts by the school is required.

1. If the parent does not attend the first attempt, another meeting must be scheduled. 

2. If the parent does not attend the second meeting, the rest of the IEP team can move forward with the meeting and count this second date as the new annual IEP date. 

Be sure to offer that the parent can attend the meeting via phone call or video conference.

The case manager must keep a record of attempts to arrange a mutually agreed upon time and place, such as records of phone calls made or attempted and the results of those calls, copies of correspondence sent to the parents/guardians and any responses received, and records of visits made to the parent’s home or place of employment and the results of those visits.

Unexpected Parent Absences

Q: Say that an IEP meeting is due by 11/9/17 and I schedule the meeting for 11/9/17, the parent agrees to the meeting time/date, and then the parent does not attend or respond to attempts at a phone call. We have to make a second attempt at the meeting, and when I contact the parent the second attempt is scheduled on 11/13/17. If a first attempt is made (and documented) within timeline, are we still in compliance?

A: No. The date the IEP meeting was actually held (11/13/17) would be the date that would be used for compliance. Therefore, the IEP would not meet requirements for annual review. This is one of the reasons why it is suggested that teams schedule IEP meetings before the actual due date so there is a "buffer" in case a second attempt needs to be scheduled.

Unless noted above (i.e., resident district representatives for students placed in shared programs, representatives of agencies providing post-secondary transition services) written consent is required from the parent(s) if a required team member will be absent from the IEP meeting.

Excusal Process

If the team member on the Notice of Team Meeting (NOTM) is unavailable but someone at the meeting can fill that role:

As long as staff in attendance at the meeting can fill the required team member roles, we can edit the Record of Team Meeting (ROTM) form to reflect the change in roles and then proceed with the meeting. An example might be a building principal having an urgent responsibility that prevents them from attending an IEP meeting. The building principal was listed as the Administrative Representative on the NOTM. The team can still proceed if another member of the team (e.g., a school psychologist) is in attendance and is qualified to fill that role. 

The substitute team member would edit the ROTM and add "Administrative Representative" to their title on the form. If no team member is present who is qualified to fill that role, the IEP team would need to complete the formal excusal process (explained below) or reschedule the meeting. The team must offer the parent the opportunity to reschedule the meeting if the parent does not wish to proceed.

If the team member's content area WILL NOT be discussed or modified:

This is a rare circumstance. Prior to beginning the IEP meeting, written consent for excusal must be obtained from the parent. This is documented on the Agreement Regarding IEP Team Member Attendance form in SpEd Forms.

If the team member's content area WILL be discussed or modified:

This is by far the more common circumstance. Written consent from the parent must still be obtained prior to beginning the IEP meeting. Prior to the meeting, the team member who will miss all or part of the meeting must also submit appropriate input in writing to the IEP team. This input should include the same things that would be provided if the member attended the meeting. General education teachers should describe expectations in their class, the student’s use of accommodations and/or modifications, AT, and assistance needed by a paraprofessional (if applicable). Service providers should report progress on previous goals and provide draft goals for the upcoming year.

The forms below were created in Chisago Lakes and North Branch to collect input from IEP team members who are unable to attend the meeting. In some secondary buildings, the forms are completed by all of a student's teachers prior to the IEP meeting. This provides the case manager with a current picture of the student's performance across settings, which can make it much easier to structure discussion during the meeting.

• IEP Team Member Input: This form asks about strengths, needs, and changes to the student's supplementary aids and services.

  • Teacher Form (Click here to make a copy)

  • Administrator Form (Click here to make a copy)

• Student Performance Checklist: This form asks about the student's independence in several areas of functioning.

  • Teacher Form (Click here to make a copy)

  • Administrator Form (Click here to make a copy)

Communication with Parents

Case managers or due process secretaries should call parents and complete the excusal process before the meeting date. If circumstances do not allow for this (e.g., the general education teacher gets sick the day of meeting), the excusal process should be completed prior to the start of the IEP meeting, and parents have the right not to proceed with the meeting if they want the team member present. Unless written consent was previously received from the parent, no required IEP team member may be excused from a meeting when a parent is not present.

Multiple Special Education Teachers or Service Providers

To meet minimal compliance requirements, a single special education teacher or service provider must be invited and attend the meeting in full. During state file review, auditors will check that the IEP team included at least one special education teacher or service provider. If none have signed on the Record of Team Meeting and written agreement/written input is not documented in the file, the district will be out of compliance.

The constitution of team membership cannot impact the student’s right to FAPE nor the parent’s opportunity to meaningfully participate in the development of the IEP, and case managers should consider this standard when determining how many service providers to invite and, in cases where multiple service providers have been invited and some are subsequently unable to attend, when to obtain written input and written consent. 

We have to meet minimal compliance and have at least one individual in this role in attendance (unless we have documented formal excusal), but if, for example, the student has five service providers, all are invited, and one is subsequently unable to attend the meeting, the case manager should determine if the individuals present can plan an IEP that will provide FAPE and if the parent can meaningfully participate in developing that IEP without the absent team member. If the answer is "no," written excusal should be obtained from the parent and written input obtained from the absent team member.

The student is a required team member only if the team will consider post-secondary goals and transition services. Prior to consideration of post-secondary support, it is up to the parent whether or not the student is invited to the IEP meeting (per the U.S. Department of Education).

In reality, parents and children often make this decision together. It's not uncommon for parents and even teachers to encourage children to take part in developing their own IEPs. Some children in elementary school come to the meeting just to learn a little about the process or to share information about themselves.

IDEA 2004 (300.321(a)(6)) specifically refers to related services personnel as individuals who may be invited to participate in an IEP team meeting at the parent or district's discretion. *Note that if the team member is filling a required role (e.g., service provider) their attendance would not be considered discretionary.* Related services can include, but are not limited to, any of the following (refer to IDEA 2004 300.34 for a complete description):

• Speech-language pathology and audiology services

• Physical and occupational therapy

• School nurse/health services

• School social work services

• Psychological or counseling services