Or used as leverage to show a desired accommodation is conventional and in the school's much beloved misuse of the term, "reasonable".  Me, I downloaded it to sit pretty in my cloud storage.

I do get the desire to have some measure of standardization as to policy and care, to avoid mistakes and confusion.

But I also smell a control measure here on the part of the school district that would thwart meaningful individualization of accommodations . . . kind of an "eff U" but we still "accommodated" -- KWIM?

The preset limitations certainly violates the principle of addressing unique needs.  Other major standout is what does one with MFA do with this?  Rhetorical question.

On the other hand it standardizes quite a few decent modifications and accommodations and not everyone is interested in, or has the ability to hammer out a thorough 504.  The single largest issue that tanks this is violating procedural safeguards in my opinion.  Parental participation is non-existent from the beginning because the school limits the format, it's too strong arm "accept this or not".  That is not decisions made by a team of persons knowledgeable about the child, in fact it would be impossible for a parent to have participated in crafting the 504. 

And that is how I as a parent would respond to a preset form by pointing out gross procedural safeguards for due process of the law.  I'd draft my own using their template following the 504 process as laid out by federal law and not change course.  If for no other reason for an investigator trained in procedure to follow my work compliant to the process if I had to go to a 504 hearing or file a complaint with OCR.

A piece of advice I received... or maybe it was strategy recommendation? Anyhow, it was let the failures happen at the lower levels in order to really nail it higher up.  It wouldn't work in all cases but in some cases it what makes the landmark decisions.

I think this "form" is that county's response to being reported to OCR . . . and the couple of cases we have posted here.  That is my suspicion. 

I'm not sure I've seen the whole resolution and list of OCR requirements for Union County, NC -- would need to go back and re-read all in both related threads (this and other one I linked).

At the bottom of that check off list is a section for write-ins called "Other" . . . but that means you may have to fight the school to get them to agree to put things there . . .

daisy, I believe this is a coordinated roll out from possibly the NSBA, or from some other centralized source.  I may have to confront it in my district if there is no mechanism to address unique needs.  More than likely there is some sort of procedure to do so even if it is not on this specific form.  No 504 can be preset due to unique needs.

It's not a bad template as far as templates go so it wouldn't discourage me, but I'd submit my own version not just check off a sheet.  There's no reason to reject a well written version similar to their format if format is the issue.

That's interesting.  Is it normal for districts to have a "menu" of accommodations? 

FYI -- this is link to latest Union County "form" 504 Plan --

https://webcp.ucps.k12.nc.us/forms_manager/documents/290/Section_504_Plan_for_Students_with_Food_and_PTAs_Revised_4-25-14.pdf

I see different complaint numbers in all the docs . . . but doesn't mean that THIS resolution you linked to is NOT related to the originals.

But the link you posted with the verbiage requiring 504s for ALL LTFA is a whole lot like the Virginia Beach outcome.

Makes me think there was follow-on complaint from either the same family in Union County or another LTFA family . . . and OCR took the district to task for not having 504s for all the LTFA students.

There would likely be other documents to go with the one you posted/linked to -- getting those via FOIA request might shed more light.

Regional OCR office handling North Carolina would be the Washington, DC office -- which also handles Virginia.

I assumed they were connected -- but haven't sat to re-read the first and side-by-side compare.  But definitely BOTH from Union County, NORTH Carolina (superintendent name -- Mary Ellis -- matches up as current Super for Union County, NC).

We could do FOIA request and get both/all to be sure -- although there will be redactions of names . . . but usually we here "get" the finer details such that we can tell if same-same, KWIM?

But could be possible that Union County, NC got taken to task same as Virginia Beach did?

Or maybe because Virginia Beach did?  Who knows . . .

Now I'm confused.  This 2014 resolution agreement was from a complaint dating back to 2006?  And that complaint is horrifying.  That poor child.  Unbelievable!

Thank you!

Just connecting the 2 threads here:

OCR Union County, NORTH CAROLINA Documents (ajasfolks2)

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/docs/investigations/more/11131324-b.pdf

I did not quote the full document.  Bolded areas are mine.

QuoteBy February 28, 2014, the District will submit, for OCR approval, a Section 504 Plan for each School student with a food allergy for whom such a Plan is required by Section 504 or Title II, and all District and School policies, procedures, and practices to be established or amended pursuant to this Agreement. Each Section 504 Plan will incorporate by reference the student's Individual Health Plan (IHP), which IHP must be consistent with the treating physician's medical orders. The Section 504 Plan for each student will provide all aids and services that are required by Section 504 and Title II. With regard to the evaluation for and establishment of each Section 504 Plan, the District will: draw upon a variety of sources in evaluating the student; document and carefully consider the information obtained from all sources, including all available medical information regarding the student's food allergies, the nature and severity of the student's food allergies, and the types of exposure that can result in the student having a food allergy-related reaction (e.g., whether such reactions are most likely to occur due to ingestion or topical or airborne exposure); and ensure that the Plan is developed by a group of individuals knowledgeable about the student, food allergies, and the School's programs. Each Section 504 Plan will include either the following elements or references to the District and/or School policies, procedures, and/or practices that contain these elements.

a. Adequate policies, procedures, and practices governing food allergy
risk management in each type of School program and activity,
including the student's classroom and common use rooms (e.g., the
cafeteria, library, computer labs, gymnasium, and art and music
rooms), and during recess periods, bus transportation, field trips, and
extracurricular, School-sponsored activities.

b. Sufficient emergency response policies, procedures, and practices
covering all School programs and activities to address instances in
which the student is suspected of having a food allergy-related
reaction. These procedures will address the proper handling and
administration of epinephrine in the event of an anaphylactic or other
serious allergy-related reaction, and will identify the staff responsible
for emergency responses.
c. A requirement that all District staff (including substitutes) responsible
for the immediate custodial supervision or care of the student will
receive adequate, periodic training on food allergies and the
implementation of the student's Plan. Also when, how often, for how
long, and by whom the training will be conducted, and the content of
the training.
d. A requirement that at least one staff person who is adequately trained
in food allergies to recognize the signs and symptoms of anaphylaxis,
and who can administer epinephrine consistent with applicable
policies, procedures, and practices, be at the School during all regular
school hours and at all School-sponsored activities attended by the
student.
e. The food allergy-related responsibilities of staff, parents, and students
in all School programs and activities, and an effective process for
communicating their food allergy-related responsibilities to them.
4. The District will, within three weeks of its receipt of the OCR approvals
referenced in Provision 3: (a) finalize and implement all of the Section 504 Plans
for School students with food allergies; (b) adopt and publish all policies,
procedures, and practices established or amended pursuant to this Agreement;
(c) notify appropriate staff of all Section 504 Plans for School students with food
allergies; and (d) notify all School staff, parents, and students of the policies,
procedures, and practices established or amended pursuant to this Agreement.
5. The District will maintain such documentation of the above commitments as is
needed to demonstrate that it has fulfilled those commitments.
REPORTING PROVISIONS
6. Within six weeks of the OCR approvals referenced in Provision 3, above, the District will provide OCR with: (a) signed copies of all of the Section 504 Plans for School students with food allergies; (b) copies of and Internet links to all policies, procedures, and practices established or amended pursuant to this Agreement; and (c) one sample copy each of the above-referenced notification of policies, procedures, and practices sent to a School staff person, parent, and student.
7. If the District is unable to meet any of the timeframes in this Agreement, it will, within the timeframes set out in this Agreement, provide OCR with a written explanation of why timely compliance was not achieved and a timetable for achieving compliance.