HB 5425 would address different issues related to special education, and includes a clause related to a provision of applied behavior analysis to students with autism diagnoses whose IEPs call for such, provider qualifications for those services and one mechanism to increase pool of providers.
The text relevant to the practice of behavior analysis can be found in Section 2., page 5, [lines 127-158] Text is reformatted for readability; please consult bill for original.
Start of clause,
Sec. 2. (NEW) (Effective July 1, 2010)
(a) On and after July 1, 2012, local and regional boards of education shall provide applied behavior analysis services to those students with autism spectrum disorder whose individualized education plan or plan pursuant to Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 requires such services.
Such services shall be provided by a person who is
(1) subject to the provisions of subsection (b) of this section, licensed by the Department of Public Health or certified by the Department of Education and such services are within the scope of practice of such license or certificate, or
(2) certified by the Behavior Analyst Certification Board as a behavior analyst or assistant behavior analyst, provided such assistant behavior analyst is working under the supervision of a certified behavior analyst.
For purposes of this section, "applied behavior analysis" means the design, implementation and evaluation of environmental modifications, using behavioral stimuli and consequences, including the use of direct observation, measurement and functional analysis of the relationship between the environment and behavior, to produce socially significant improvement in human behavior.
(b) If the Commissioner of Education determines that there are insufficient certified personnel available to provide applied behavior analysis services in accordance with the provisions of subsection (a) of this section, the commissioner may authorize the provision of such services by persons who:
(B) coursework that meets the eligibility requirement to sit for the board certified behavior analyst examination;
(3) are supervised by a board certified behavior analyst.
(c) Nothing in this section shall be construed to require the provision of applied behavior analysis services in an individualized education plan or plan pursuant to Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973.
"Sec. 12. (NEW) (Effective July 1, 2009) On or before January 1, 2010, the Attorney General, in consultation with the Commissioners of Education and Higher Education, shall report, in accordance with the provisions of section 11-4a of the general statutes, to the joint standing committee of the General Assembly having cognizance of matters relating to education on any investigation conducted regarding behavior analysis services for children with autism spectrum disorder performed in the state. Such report shall include any findings based on such investigation, recommendations for statutory changes and recommendations for an appropriate in-state certifying agency for behavioral analysis services."
This evening, March 3, 2010, the U.S. House of Representatives passed by a vote of 262 to 153, the House Committee on Education and Labor Substitute for H.R. 4247, formerly known as the "Preventing Harmful Restraint and Seclusion in Schools Act", and now renamed,
"...The Keeping All Students Safe Act would establish, for the first time, minimum federal standards to provide equal protections to all students, in every state across the country. It would make clear that physical restraint or locked seclusion should be used only when there is imminent danger of injury and only when imposed by trained staff. It would prohibit mechanical restraints, such as strapping children to chairs, misusing therapeutic equipment to punish students or duct-taping parts of their bodies and any restraint that restricts breathing.
It would also prohibit chemical restraint, which are medications used to control behavior that are not consistent with a doctor’s prescription.
The bill would prohibit school staff from including restraint or seclusion as planned interventions in student’s education plans, known as Individualized Education Programs (IEPs). It would also require schools to notify parents immediately after incidents when restraint or seclusion was used..."
If H.R. 4247 progresses to Federal law, it would apply to all public and private schools which accept Federal funding, and all states would be expected to comply with, if not exceed, the conditions specified in the bill.
Progress of H.R. 4247 is dependent on what action is taken in the House, but it has been anticipated that if it passes in that chamber, that a conference committee would work to consolidate proposals within H.R. 4247 and those within S. 2860: Preventing Harmful Restraint and Seclusion in Schools Act, which was introduced in the U.S. Senate and is currently in the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
Inside Behavior Analysis
Volume 1 | 2009 | Number 2 | On-line ISSN: 2151-4704 ABAI Practice Board
(About 3/4 of the way down the page.)
"Position Statements
The ABAI Council assembles task forces to study critical issues within the field and to develop white papers for submittal to the Association' s Full Members for input and votes. Most recently, a task force on seclusion and restraint has been formed, with joint participation of the Science and Practice Boards. The task force will develop and recommend a position statement on the appropriate use of seclusion and restraint for consideration by ABAI Full Members. Participants in the task force include Jon Bailey, Michael F. Dorsey, Louis P. Hagopian, Gregory P. Hanley, David B. Lennox, Mary M. Riordan, Scott Spreat, and Timothy R. Vollmer. "
On February 25, 2010, the South Carolina Legislature House Ways and Means Committee adopted a budget that would not only reduce the base budget by $42.3 million, but these reductions would lose the state matching Medicaid and other Federal funds which supply additional revenue for disability services at a ratio of 2:1 in Federal to state funds - resulting in an additional $110 million dollar shortfall.
The South Carolina Department of Disabilities and Special Needs estimates that should the cuts not be restored, by necessity it must meet the needs of 4800 individuals in residential care; to accomplish that in the face of the proposed budget cuts would require elimination of service to 25,700 consumers being served under categories such as,
autism,
brain injury,
mental retardation, and
spinal cord injury,
and services including, but not limited to:
early intervention,
day programs,
workshops,
respite,
family support,
acute rehabilitation for traumatic brain injury and spinal cord injury,
attendant care,
the Pervasive Developmental Disorder (PDD) program,
specialized therapies, and
service coordination.
An estimated 3100 jobs would also be lost with the budget cut.
Information on Disability Advocacy Day,
including what needs to happen before showing up to the capitol, and directions and parking.
March 3, 2010, 9:00AM-2:00PM South Carolina Autism Society
