Winkelman's Ohio Case - Why not just use a scholarship?

[Guest guest]

The reason why the Winkelmans did not just apply for a scholarship was

because their dispute began before the scholarship program was

available. Hard to imagine their dispute, which stemmed from their

youngest son's 2003 IEP, has yet to be heard on the substantive issues

of its case. The only ruling they have received to date is that they

can pursue their claims without an attorney. So that is where they are

now, finally, five years later.

However, the Supreme Court diversion (initiated by the District as a

stall tactic because the Winkelman's ran out of funds to pay attorneys

while paying for a private school for their son in order to provide an

appropriate education for him,) didn't really add that much time to a

typical litigation timetable for these claims. Sure, the due process

dog and pony show can usually be wrapped up within a year. But once

you hit a real court, a simple appeal for a motion for judgment on the

record (review of existing evidence and testimony, no new hearing) can

take two years. So then you're at three already. If the parent wins

and the district appeals, add two. If there is an appeal after the

court of appeals, add two more. It is not uncommon for this to last

ten years since the original dispute arose. Imagine what's happening

to the child all this time in an inappropriate placement, or to the

family who is footing the education bill and legal fees all on their

own. I can. I am living it right now. Our dispute began in 2004 and we

haven't even made it through round one of federal court yet.

Since it was asked, this is what Sandee replied when I asked her about

not just applying for the scholarship. She gave me permission to share

with the group:

(Ohio's Autism Scholarship Program was enacted in 2003 and began

operation Spring 2004)

The scholarship has been the best thing that ever happened to Ohio.

I have one child on the scholarship but was denied the scholarship for

my younger son since I am in litigation on the 2003 IEP. It has been

in federal court for years and if I dismiss that case I can get the

scholarship. I am not willing to do so since that case has the

potential to effect every school year after 2003. I have too much at

stake. The scholarship really does stop complaints and litigation for

sure. That is the bonus to the school district. They don't have to

worry about DP when you take the scholarship so it makes sense to them

to work with the parents. It is really nice to go once a year and give

them an update on my child and they work along side the parent and

write and IEP. No problems ever with the IEP for my child on the

scholarship. It has been a blessing. But for the one not on the

scholarship I have been to DP each school year. So there you go.

I hope this helps clear up any confusion. There is no perfect way but

this has sure been close to perfect for hundreds of parents here in

Ohio. I only hope all children on an IEP can get this option. Many

parents want the public and would never go to a private--that's okay.

But for those who want small classes, intensive services, social

skills, and methods that the public won't consider, why go to DP? Take

the scholarship and respectfully leave the district on good terms and

if all else fails the public has to take you back. They always have

to provide FAPE if you so request that. While you are on the

scholarship you can't ask the local for FAPE but you can drop out

anytime you wish.

If you need any questions answered let me know. I would be glad to

discuss this with you.

Best,

Sandee Winkelman

School choice has saved $444 million

May 09, 2007

New study analyzes fiscal impact of the nation's school choice programs

INDIANAPOLIS—A landmark new study finds that school choice programs

throughout the country generated nearly $444 million in net savings to

state and local budgets from 1990 to 2006. Contrary to opponents'

predictions, the analysis also finds that instructional spending per

student has consistently gone up in all affected public school

districts and states.

" School choice saves. It saves children, and now we have empirical

evidence that it saves money, " said Enlow, executive director

and COO of the Milton and Rose D. Friedman Foundation. " In the face of

$444 million in savings, another excuse to deny children a quality

education has vanished before our eyes. "

Released by the Friedman Foundation, " Education by the Numbers: The

Fiscal Effect of School Choice Programs, 1990-2006 " provides the first

comprehensive analysis of how the nation's school choice programs have

affected state and public school districts. Of the 12 voucher and

tax-credit scholarship programs that began operations before 2006,

every program is at least fiscally neutral, and most produce

substantial savings. Seven more programs have been created since 2006.

" Programs giving parents freedom to choose in their child's education

are growing rapidly in number and size, " said Dr. Aud, author of

the study and a Friedman Foundation senior fellow. " And a program's

fiscal impact has become an important political issue. This brings

empirical evidence to that debate. "

For years, opponents have claimed that school choice reduces spending

in public schools. Yet the study's analysis of the states and school

districts where school choice is available finds that this is not the

case. Instructional spending in areas affected by school choice has

uniformly increased.

" Opponents of educational freedom will find it tougher to bend the

truth. Our research adheres to the highest standards of scientific

rigor, " said Enlow. " We've seen seven school choice programs start in

just the last year because evidence of the benefits are growing just

as rapidly. "

The study can be downloaded at

http://www.friedmanfoundation.org/friedman/research/ShowResearchItem.do?id=10079\

..

>

> It just occurred to me that the Winkleman's-the ones who took

>

> Their case all the way to the Supreme Court were in Ohio----

>

> They were trying to get reimbursement from the school district

>

> For a private school. Gee, I wonder why they didn't just apply for

>

> A scholarship, since they are in Ohio??

>

> S.

>

>

>

> From: Texas-Autism-Advocacy

> [mailto:Texas-Autism-Advocacy ] On Behalf Of

mom2boysplano

> Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2008 3:45 PM

> To: Texas-Autism-Advocacy

> Subject: [sPAM] Re: Letter to National

Educators Law

> Institute

>

>

>

> Not that a school choice program for children with autism is the

> perfect answer to everyone's problem, but I wonder what impact it

> would have had on seminars like these? I'd bet they'd lose their

> utility for our educators overnight. Especially considering autism is

> by far the most litigated issue in Special Education. Might even put

> NELI out of business, or at the very least take a big gust of wind

> out of their sails.

>

>