504 and the Principal

[MomTo3]

Editing for privacy.

[ajasfolks2]

I am wondering if she is afraid to say anything . . . maybe afraid to make it worse than what she's already done?

[ajasfolks2]

Have you had zero response to your email to her?

If so, I'd maybe forward it to her with a top line of, "Awaiting your response."

[MomTo3]

Not a word in person or via email. 

[ajasfolks2]

Many school districts have policy as to required email response and time frame.  I'm surprised she didn't at least respond to acknowledge receipt.

I'd forward to her again -- always either cc or bcc yourself . . .

then begin considering to whom you will forward at district level with notification of zero response from principal and ask the district how this will be handled?  (With some sort of request for response within a certain time frame.)

[guess]

It would be fair to ask (them, in writing) at this point where in the 504 process you are in to address violations, that you would like to ensure all safeguards for procedure are in place.  The amount of time to response is critical as the 504 accommodations are explicitly to address life-threatening disability.  You could also ask for them to provide a copy of their 504 procedural handbook and location of their grievance procedure.  Right now you're not doing anything but performing due diligence by investigating your child's educational rights.

One notch up is you're concerned of a lack of a response at the building level, but at least tried before reaching out to the district, state, or federal level for response.  Another option is providing some related open records from previous OCR letters of findings or settlement agreements that map out responsibilities.  Just don't be surprised if it fails at the district level.  Some administrators like administration games but their tolerance may be lower threshold than they first appear.  More blustery.

In the meantime cement this all in writing with all the names, dates that an investigator may need to see to interpret compliance or lack thereof.  Create a log with information of high evidentiary quality if possible even in cases like this where lapsed time may be inference of deliberate choice to not act despite informed.

BTW, not a lawyer can't give out legal advice.

[MomTo3]

I sent a nice "Wanted to be sure you got this and that we're all clear."

Got a response within hours this time.  It was very curt and pretty much a "screw you".

[guess]

will repost in OT upon request

[MomTo3]

.

[ajasfolks2]

The policy of giving the admin the green light to act as King (or queen)  is not OK by me . . . and any 504 accommodation can and will trump.  SHOULD TRUMP!!
Just my opinion  . . . not a lawyer . . . it's a stupid attempt at work around, IMO.

 

[guess]

In what regard?  Like an IRAC analysis? 

[MomTo3]

In what regard?  Like an IRAC analysis?

Well yes and no.  From a FA view it seems to leave a LOT of room for error (leaving it to the desecration of the building admin).  Though I guess it depends on how clued in the building admin is.

[ajasfolks2]

Why would any building admin WANT this responsibility and liability?  It is stooooopid!

[guess]

As worded, it could work.  As shown, execution is lacking.

From what I can tell there are two interrelated junctures for decision making.

1.  Policy can expand on federal protections but they can't reduce them.  Does administrator factor this in?  Yes, move on to next step.  No, go back to start.

2.  Does the approval process of the administrator take in to consideration the necessary allergens, actual risk-benefit calculations and access issues to ensure FAPE?  Yes, (not likely) all kids needs coordinated.  No, (likely) go back to drawing board.

In my eyes the problem is the principal going maverick like he or she is a one-person Halloween special, peddling sweets and encouraging ingestion in direct opposition of 504 compliance, an unreasonable expectation placed upon the child's age-appropriate ability to self advocate, and common sense. 

My personal opinion is the administrator is being petty.  Dial the candy back, you know? It's not that hard.  But maybe that's what s/he is doing. *shrug*

I can't think of a single credible medical resources that encourages adults, ANY adults, to give children more candy. 

[MomTo3]

Why would any building admin WANT this responsibility and liability?  It is stooooopid!

EXACTLY!  Why would they want to make those decisions? It goes back to being unqualified to make the medical decision of giving food to a child with any number of food related issues.