Transfer IEP, Bilingual Evaluation, and SLPA Delegation
Marisol is a monolingual English-speaking SLP in a K–5 public school. On October 3, a new student, Diego, age 7;6, enrolls from another state. His records contain an IEP dated four years earlier listing speech-language services of 30 minutes weekly for "articulation," but no evaluation report, no progress data, and no information about his English proficiency. Diego's mother reports that Spanish is the primary home language and that he began learning English at age 5. The principal tells Marisol to "just carry over the IEP" so services start immediately, and the IEP's annual review date is 14 days away. Marisol also supervises one SLPA two hours per week and has been asked to add Diego to that SLPA's schedule. Diego's mother has not signed consent for any new evaluation, and the special education teacher wants to begin reading intervention next week.
1. What should Marisol do about Diego's services and evaluation before the IEP meeting in 14 days? Explain the legal and ethical reasoning, including consent and timelines.
Read the worked answer
Two obligations operate at once, and neither cancels the other. Because Diego transfers with an IEP, the receiving district must provide services comparable to those in the old IEP until the team adopts that IEP or develops a new one. The principal is therefore right that services should not lapse, but wrong that "carry over" ends the inquiry. Marisol should begin the 30 minutes weekly immediately, document a baseline, and convene the team.
The old IEP is four years old, contains no evaluation report or progress data, and addresses only articulation. That is not an adequate basis for current eligibility or programming. A full and individual evaluation is needed, and parental consent for that evaluation must be obtained in writing, in a language the mother understands, with an explanation that services will continue during the evaluation. Marisol should follow the state's evaluation timeline, commonly 60 days. She should not approve the reading intervention as a substitute for special education, change service minutes unilaterally, or let the SLPA begin before an evaluated plan exists. If the mother declines consent, the district must still provide comparable services and document its efforts and the refusal.
2. How should Marisol conduct the speech-language evaluation so that bilingual development is not mistaken for disorder? Give concrete assessment choices.
Read the worked answer
Marisol should first establish Diego's language history: age of first English exposure, relative amount of Spanish and English input, who speaks each language, and which language he prefers and uses most easily. She should assess in both languages using a bilingual SLP or a trained interpreter, not a family member, and should not score an interpreter-administered test against English norms as if it were valid. English standardized testing can be one data point, but the report must state the limits of those norms for a sequential bilingual child.
Concrete data should include language samples in Spanish and English analyzed for mean length of utterance, vocabulary diversity, grammar, and narrative skill; dynamic assessment using a test–teach–retest format; parent and teacher reports of everyday communication; and classroom observation. Marisol should consider typical sequential bilingual patterns such as a silent period, code-switching, and cross-linguistic influence, and should apply the exclusionary factors: limited English proficiency is not a disability. Eligibility should rest on converging evidence of a disorder in both languages and on educational impact, not on a single English score.
3. The principal wants Diego added to the SLPA's schedule. What professional and supervisory requirements apply, and what should Marisol verify before agreeing?
Read the worked answer
Marisol retains responsibility for diagnosis, evaluation, IEP development, and the treatment plan; an SLPA implements that plan, collects data, and prepares materials. The SLPA cannot conduct the initial evaluation, interpret standardized tests, determine eligibility, write goals, or counsel the family about prognosis. ASHA guidance requires the supervising SLP to provide at least 20% supervision of the SLPA's work time, including direct observation, with documentation; state licensure or certification rules may be stricter and must be checked.
Diego should not be placed with the SLPA before the evaluation and IEP are complete, because no lawful plan exists for the assistant to implement. Marisol should verify the SLPA's credential and the school's policy on assistant services, confirm that the 20% supervision can realistically be delivered given her existing two hours per week, and document supervision. If the added caseload would make adequate supervision impossible, she should say so in writing rather than accept a plan she cannot supervise. The ethical issue is not whether the SLPA is capable; it is whether delegation is lawful, supervised, and tied to an evaluated plan.