March 29, 2024
Chairpersons and honorable members of the Committee. My name is Catherine E. Johnson. I am the Executive Director of Disability Rights Iowa. DRI is an independent, non-profit agency, which serves as the designated protection and advocacy system for people with disabilities in the state of Iowa, pursuant to federal mandates. The mission of the agency is to protect and advocate for the human and legal rights of Iowans with disabilities. I appear before you to share DRI’s concerns regarding the impact of HF 2254 on the Disability Community.
DRI’s expertise in special education.
DRI represents students with disabilities who are at risk of being excluded from school based on their disabilities. DRI has experience representing students with complex behavioral needs in suspensions, restraints, and seclusions, shortened school days, and other disciplinary matters. As part of this work, DRI attends IEP meetings, work with schools and AEAs to obtain appropriate supports and services that enable students to remain in school and represent families in dispute resolution proceedings.
HF 2254 would have a significant impact on students with disabilities.
The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) requires that schools make reasonable modifications to policies and procedures that would otherwise have the effect of disparate treatment towards people with disabilities. The requirements of HS 2254 do not allow for individual consideration of why students with disabilities are absent from school. HF 2254 requires schools to follow a one-size-fits-all approach to absence from school. HF 2254 requirements may conflict with the ADA and students with disabilities rights to request reasonable modifications.
Students with disabilities miss school due to their disability for a variety of reasons, such as attending medical appointments and private services (behavioral therapy, physical therapy, occupational therapy, speech therapy, etc.), participating in vocational training or other community resources, or managing symptoms of their disabilities.
Students with behavioral disabilities are at a higher risk of being removed from school, by school staff. Removals may be formal suspension(s), expulsion(s), and informal removals – for example requests by schools for the student to either leave school before other students or to start the day later than other students.
Schools sometimes fail to properly document student removals and absences, resulting in unexcused absences that should have been excused. Even if a school properly documents the manner of the student’s absence, HF 2254’s language that a student who is absent “for any reason” is subject to this legislation would include even appropriately documented and excused absences. This would disproportionately impact students with disabilities in violation of the ADA.
There are a multitude of reasons why students with disabilities might be classified as truant, under HS 2254, but the specific circumstances of the situation may not warrant further intervention. Currently, schools have discretion on what action, if any, should be taken when a student is considered truant. This allows parents and schools to work together to address the individual needs of the student, rather than be forced into a one-size-fits-all approach.
HF 2254’s requirement to develop an improvement plan also does not allow room to consider that a student may not be able to improve their attendance due to their disability. Many disabilities are chronic and incurable, and they can ebb and flow with a great deal of variety. A student improving their attendance may not be within their control due to the nature of their disability.
Involving the county attorney’s office for every student who falls into HF 2254’s definition of truancy also risks exposing students with disabilities to the judicial system at a disproportionate rate. Students with disabilities already face a disproportionate amount of involvement with the juvenile justice system, which has been shown to have negative effects. HF 2254 would only increase the amount of contact students have with the judicial system, further exacerbating this issue.
DRI opines that HF 2254 will have a negative impact on students with disabilities, may violate federal law and further disenfranchise students with disabilities resulting in increased referrals to the juvenile justice system. DRI opposes this legislation and requests the Sub-Committee not to move this bill forward.
DRI welcomes the opportunity to discuss this in more depth with any member of the Iowa Legislature. Thank you in advance for your thoughtful deliberation of our testimony in opposition of HF 2254.
