Post reply

The message has the following error or errors that must be corrected before continuing:
Warning: this topic has not been posted in for at least 365 days.
Unless you're sure you want to reply, please consider starting a new topic.
Other options
Verification:
Please leave this box empty:
Type the letters shown in the picture
Listen to the letters / Request another image

Type the letters shown in the picture:
Spell the answer to 6 + 7 =:
Please spell spammer backwards:
Shortcuts: ALT+S post or ALT+P preview

Topic summary

Posted by Stinky10
 - April 01, 2014, 12:51:40 PM
THANK YOU TT

This thread is awesome!
Posted by ajasfolks2
 - August 05, 2013, 02:09:49 PM
Bumping as start of school approaches and many of us have to manage LTFA with regard to the PTA/PTO as it interfaces (or tries to run, LOL) the school!

Posted by Macabre
 - April 04, 2013, 07:43:43 AM
Thank you!  I found that a better, more effective format than the other one--which I did not do, because I didn't have time to do a free form kind of response.
Posted by ajasfolks2
 - April 03, 2013, 05:15:34 PM
Link to related survey to take related to this topic:

http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/P2VK2DH

Posted by Macabre
 - April 02, 2013, 09:17:13 PM
The link below gives us the opportunity to tell our story about the importance of inclusion--and how so often exclusion is perpetuated by PTO/PTA groups.

http://www.anaphylaxiscouncil.org/advocacy-hub.html

QuoteCURRENT OPPORTUNITIES TO ADVOCATE
PTA, PTO & PTSO

The initial purpose of parent, teacher and student organizations serving schools, is to essentially engage and empower families and communities to advocate for all children.

Their values include: collaboration, committment, accountability, respect, inclusivity and integrity.

Unfortunately, there is a disconnect from the National level organization and the school run organizations. Time after time in the allergy & anaphylaxis community we hear stories of discrimination and isolation. 

Help us to compile a set of stories and testimonies from, YOU, the community. Thank you to those who have shared their story!
Posted by Macabre
 - April 02, 2013, 09:16:38 PM

QuoteGot Inclusion?
The National Allergy and Anaphylaxis Allergy Council (NAAC) has announced a new initiative called "Got Inclusion." The focus is on driving policies within schools for parent/teacher and parent/teacher/student organizations.

Do your or your kids with food allergies feel left of activities planned by these organizations? Is food central to the meetings/activities? The NAAC wants to know what your experience has been. Please take the survey if you have a school-aged child with food allergies. Click here to take the survey.

http://www.learningtoeatallergyfree.com/2013/04/got-inclusion.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+LearningToEatAllergyFree-MultipleFoodAllergies+%28Learning+to+Eat+Allergy+Free+-+Multiple+Food+Allergies%29


Posted by twinturbo
 - March 28, 2013, 01:08:10 PM
Check out this phenomenal slideshow by a PTA chapter on food allergy, anaphylaxis, cross-contamination, contact reactions and the use of food in activities, AND unexpected non-food sources of top 8 allergens.
Posted by twinturbo
 - March 28, 2013, 07:45:59 AM
The OCR Letter of Findings has a lot of clarity in it, definitely worth a read through for (1) resolutions that may not be as helpful as we would wish (2) addresses disability intimidation.

Significant assistance means that as long as the SD is providing direct or indirect significant assistance it must not do so to an organization (entity, so forth and so on) perpetuating discrimination. The resolution is for the SD to either make sure the organization is no longer engaging in discriminatory practices or end its significant assistance to the organization.

Which brings us to the intimidating language used by the school in resolving its significant assistance.

QuoteAlthough the complainant has not alleged to OCR that the District attempted to intimidate her in the matter of her request to the District for services for A., OCR had a concern about certain correspondence from the District to the complainant.

In a letter of October 22, 1992, to the District the complainant asserted that she would take any action necessary to resolve the matter of her request for a modification for her son so that he could participate in the Club program. In its letter of response dated October 26, 1992, the District stated, " . . . we would hope that you'd provide a more supportive attitude to the efforts already made by the staff at College Park to accommodate your son. . . . " and "It is my sincere hope that your action will not jeopardize the availability of the PTA sponsored program that benefits many children both handicapped and nonhandicapped."

OCR believes that the language used by the District in its letter of October 26, 1992 is the type of response that may intimidate a parent requesting services for a child with disabilities and ultimately deter a parent from seeking services to which his or her child may be entitled. Intimidatory actions are prohibited by Section 504 and Title II. Although OCR makes no finding as to whether intimidation occurred in this case, it cautions the District against the use of such language. An appropriate response is to set forth the District position and provide notice of the District grievance procedures for complaints of discrimination and/or due process procedures for resolution of free appropriate public education issues.

Awesome sauce, right? Yet the resolution may not be as great because the school can opt to meet the requirement of no longer rendering significant assistance which leaves the OCR out of the equation. Note OCR's use of "reasonable" modifications, although they further cite undue burden and fundamental nature.

QuoteDuring discussions on April 15, 1993, OCR informed District representatives of its anticipated findings and discussed voluntary settlement through a corrective action plan. On April 16, 1993, OCR received a remedial plan in which the District agreed to adopt and implement a policy whereby the District will not provide significant assistance to any agency, organization, or individual that discriminates on the basis of disability. The District also agreed to provide notice of this policy to agencies, organizations, and individuals to which it provides significant assistance, and will request that any such agency, organization, or individual (a) provide qualified individuals with disabilities an equal opportunity to participate, and (b) reasonably modify their programs, to include providing supplementary services and aids as necessary for individuals with disabilities to effectively participate without increased cost to the individuals with disabilities.
Additionally, the District will advise the PTA of the PTA's obligation to provide reasonable modification and services that are medically necessary for the complainant's son to participate in the PTA Sunshine Club at College Park Elementary School. If the PTA refuses to provide the services, the District will not continue to provide assistance to the PTA unless the PTA can demonstrate that providing the services would result in a fundamental change in the program or an undue burden on the PTA.





What this means to us, I think, is that there are two ways in which we would approach OCR, assuming the SD is providing significant assistance

1. PTA/PTO or other organization is engaging in a practice that bars full access to an activity or club that student wants to participate in.

2. PTA/PTO is violating a standing accommodation in student's 504 but student is not interested in club or otherwise qualified to join (like 5th graders reading club snacking on nuts in a nut free K room). 

The arguments on violation take a slightly different flavor in each scenario, as would unfavorable resolutions by SD such as trying to remove an individual accommodation like nut free room even if a student is not actively barred from participation. In either case the school can seemingly end its responsibilities by ending its assistance or ending the violated accommodation--and that's where it gets tricky because in attempting to remove an accommodation I think at that point the school itself is engaging in 504 violation instead of indirectly assisting a private group.

Say the school chooses to end its significant assistance, does that mean as long as they charge the PTA money for room rental they can actively bar a student from access? I think they'd still have a problem there because it's happening at a public entity. Whether at that point the complaint is lodged and picked up by USDOEOCR or USDOJCRD might be debatable. Private group at public entity related to school students leans towards USDOE, but say you take up the group itself either at PTA headquarters (the national organization) or the PTO which is more of an individual local group rather than chapter of a national. That might be more USDOJ.

Whatever the case you can't have the same complaint lodged at more than one Department's OCR or CRD. It'll just bog down your case as you have to drop the complaint down to one instance, or the Departments choose in your stead. Obviously for a school that is not a recipient of Department Federal financial assistance as defined previously that crosses USDOEOCR off the list.

It would also affect the determination of significant assistance in the case of a school that may receive some program money or personnel from DOE but their buildings may be privately owned in which case if they let the PTA use the buildings and property which the private school actually owns, even if a 504 is in effect I'm not sure how much influence that over a public accommodation's ability to indirectly assist and not be held directly responsible.

Adding Title II for further recourse and responsibilities of public entities but too tired right now to follow up.

QuoteHow do Section 504 and Title II differ?

The main difference between the two laws is that one applies to the recipients of grants from the federal government (Section 504) and the other applies only to public entities (Title II). A school or college may be both a recipient of Federal funds from the US Department of Education and also a public entity. In such cases, the institution is covered by both laws.

edited to change OCR or CRD in reference to USDOJ. Added reference to Title II.
Posted by ajasfolks2
 - March 27, 2013, 06:39:49 PM
Thanks 504 Mom & TT!  Helpful to understand.

Posted by 504 Mom
 - March 27, 2013, 03:53:21 PM
Yes, TT, I brought that ruling to my meeting.  PTA uses our school property and does not pay rent. 
Posted by twinturbo
 - March 27, 2013, 03:50:30 PM
Here's one OCR investigation and ruling (Letter of Findings) regarding PTA sponsored events.

Irvine Unified School District, 19 IDELR 883 (OCR 1993) "Sigificant Assistance" would be our friend here.

QuoteInasmuch as the Club is not a program of the District, but is operated by a private organization, the PTA, the District does not have a direct obligation to provide the service itself under Section 504 or Title II. The program operator, the PTA of Orange County, therefore is not a recipient of Federal financial assistance and is not a public entity. OCR has no jurisdiction over the PTA. However, the regulations implementing Section 504 and Title II prohibit the District from providing significant assistance to any agency, organization or person that discriminates on the basis of disability. OCR therefore explored whether the District was providing significant assistance to the PTA and if so, whether the failure of the Club to provide the services discriminated against A.

Significant Assistance

Departmental interpretations of 34 C.F.R. ? 104.4(b)(1)(v) indicate that the following considerations should be examined to determine whether a recipient is providing "significant assistance" to a private group: (1) direct financial support; (2) indirect financial support; (3) provision of tangible resources such as staff and materials; (4) intangible benefits such as the lending of recognition and approval; (5) the selectivity of the recipient's provision of privileges and resources; and (6) whether the relationship is occasional and temporary or permanent and long-term. OCR examined to what extent these factors were present in the relationship between the District and the PTA Club program.

The District does not fund or subsidize any of the program's staff, and District staff do not appear to play a formal role in the operation of the program. The teachers involved are not paid for their participation in the Club by the District but rather by the organization. OCR found no direct provision of financial or staffing resources.

However, OCR did find evidence of significant indirect assistance. Based on a review of District documents and interviews with PTA and District personnel, OCR found that the Club program is located in permanent school buildings. It is not disputed that the program is housed on a District site on a permanent and long-term basis. A copy of the "Application and Permit for Use of School Facilities" shows that the provider uses "playing fields and classrooms" at the College Park Elementary School site.

The facilities-use form shows that the District has not charged the PTA a fee for the use of the facilities at the School. The PTA acknowledges that it does not pay a facilities-use fee to the District. In addition the District pays the utility and maintenance costs.

Additionally, the PTA advertises its program to parents by furnishing leaflets to students at the school site; the students then distribute them to parents. The College Park Press, a school newsletter advertises the Sunshine Club program. While the District does not operate the Club program, the Club program is closely identified with the District and benefits from that identification.

OCR finds that the District provides significant assistance to the PTA Sunshine Club program at the College Park Elementary School. The District has a substantial relationship with the program. While the District does not provide direct financial support or staff, it provides indirect financial support as well as assistance to the programs in a number of other ways. The facts meet the standards for finding significant assistance.

A refresher on the definitions of recipient and Federal financial assistance.


Quote(f) Recipient means any state or its political subdivision, any instrumentality of a state or its political subdivision, any public or private agency, institution, organization, or other entity, or any person to which Federal financial assistance is extended directly or through another recipient, including any successor, assignee, or transferee of a recipient, but excluding the ultimate beneficiary of the assistance.

(g) Applicant for assistance means one who submits an application, request, or plan required to be approved by a Department official or by a recipient as a condition to becoming a recipient.

(h) Federal financial assistance means any grant, loan, contract (other than a procurement contract or a contract of insurance or guaranty), or any other arrangement by which the Department provides or otherwise makes available assistance in the form of:

(1) Funds;

(2) Services of Federal personnel; or

(3) Real and personal property or any interest in or use of such property, including:

(i) Transfers or leases of such property for less than fair market value or for reduced consideration; and

(ii) Proceeds from a subsequent transfer or lease of such property if the Federal share of its fair market value is not returned to the Federal Government.

(i) Facility means all or any portion of buildings, structures, equipment, roads, walks, parking lots, or other real or personal property or interest in such property.

Here we go. 34 C.F.R. Part 104.4(b)(1)(v) that the case refers to, in bold.

Quote104.4 Discrimination prohibited.

(a) General. No qualified handicapped person shall, on the basis of handicap, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or otherwise be subjected to discrimination under any program or activitiy which receives Federal financial assistance.

(b) Discriminatory actions prohibited. (1) A recipient, in providing any aid, benefit, or service, may not, directly or through contractual, licensing, or other arrangements, on the basis of handicap:

(i) Deny a qualified handicapped person the opportunity to participate in or benefit from the aid, benefit, or service;

(ii) Afford a qualified handicapped person an opportunity to participate in or benefit from the aid, benefit, or service that is not equal to that afforded others;

(iii) Provide a qualified handicapped person with an aid, benefit, or service that is not as effective as that provided to others;

(iv) Provide different or separate aid, benefits, or services to handicapped persons or to any class of handicapped persons unless such action is necessary to provide qualified handicapped persons with aid, benefits, or services that are as effective as those provided to others;

(v) Aid or perpetuate discrimination against a qualified handicapped person by providing significant assistance to an agency, organization, or person that discriminates on the basis of handicap in providing any aid, benefit, or service to beneficiaries of the recipients program or activity;
Posted by 504 Mom
 - March 27, 2013, 03:48:10 PM
It was very recent. 
Posted by ajasfolks2
 - March 27, 2013, 02:47:58 PM
Quote from: 504 Mom on March 27, 2013, 01:14:35 PM
I filed a formal complaint with OCR when PTA violated my child`s 504.  I emailed the principal and she refused to do anything, claiming that she was not responsible for the activiites of PTA.  That made no sense to me.  If PTA wanted to have a gun show on campus, would the principal again say she had no control over PTA?  I don`t think so.  Someone on this board emailed me an OCR case involving PTA.  OCR ruled that since the school supports PTA (providing space for PTA activities without charging rent), school must see to it that PTA does not violate 504.

Was this fairly recent or some years ago?  Just wondering as it may help to gauge how OCR might handle this in the future and/or regional differences for some OCR offices?

Did school comply and regulate/oversee PTA and meet 504?

Posted by 504 Mom
 - March 27, 2013, 01:14:35 PM
I filed a formal complaint with OCR when PTA violated my child`s 504.  I emailed the principal and she refused to do anything, claiming that she was not responsible for the activiites of PTA.  That made no sense to me.  If PTA wanted to have a gun show on campus, would the principal again say she had no control over PTA?  I don`t think so.  Someone on this board emailed me an OCR case involving PTA.  OCR ruled that since the school supports PTA (providing space for PTA activities without charging rent), school must see to it that PTA does not violate 504. 
Posted by twinturbo
 - March 22, 2013, 07:23:36 AM
PTA is group affiliated with national organization but localized to school.

PTO is independent, not as subject to national regulations wrt to standards, dues.

Technically, I would think that means any given public school can have a PTA and PTO(s). Leveraging pressure points is going to be the same: Always work within 504 framework through administration. The difference as I see it is extra-curriculars operating outside of anything granted through USDOE financial assistance (buildings, personnel, finances and so forth).