Who Was Watching Over the Office for Civil Rights When Fox Signed the 2018 Resolution Agreement with ED OCR?

In 2015, I asked the following question:

“Who’s Watching Over the Office for Civil Rights?”

In 2021, I found the following answer from a January 2019 announcement:

"Josh comes to Mickes O’Toole from the U.S. Department of Education, Office for Civil Rights office in Kansas City, Missouri, where he oversaw civil rights compliance in seven states, including Missouri and Kansas. Josh led the office’s investigative and legal staff in the investigation and resolution of thousands of civil rights complaints arising from issues such as race or sex harassment, student discipline, special education, Title IX athletics, among many others. Josh’s work included reviewing school policies and providing training to assist public schools districts and post-secondary institutions with their compliance with federal civil rights laws."

Who's Watching Over the Office for Civil Rights?

New Missouri Law Allows Audio Recording 504 and IEP Meetings

On August 28, 2021, a new Missouri law went into effect that prevents school districts in Missouri from prohibiting parents from audio recording Individualized Education Plan (IEP) meetings or Section 504 meetings.

Missouri House Bill HB432 was signed into law by Missouri governor Mike Parson on July 14, 2021.

The passage of the new law gives parents a more level playing field when it comes to IEP and 504 meetings.

Missouri Disability Empowerment posted an article on their website about the new law:

https://www.moempower.com/recording-policy

The new law includes the following provisions related to recordings:

• The recordings of the meetings by parents or legal guardians will be the property of the parent or legal guardian.
• School districts cannot require more than 24 hours notice that a parent or guardian intends to record an IEP or 504 meeting.
• Employees who report violations of the law regarding recordings cannot be subject to discharge, retaliation or any adverse employment action for making a report.

Fox’s current school board Policy KKB: AUDIO AND VISUAL RECORDING needs to be updated to comply with the new law. Other school districts in Missouri who use the Missouri School Board Association’s board Policies and Regulations will need to update Policy KKB as well after checking some of those other school district's websites.

Fox C-6’s school board Policy KKB was last revised on: 09/20/2016.

Below are some of the recommendations that school districts should begin thinking about as noted in a May 25, 2021 blog post written by Ed Counsel, LLC:

HB 432 Allows Parental Recording of IEP and Section 504 Meetings

Ed Counsel LLC's article was written prior to the signing of the bill into law.

As noted in the article:

• Staff should be aware that parents have the ability to record IEP and Section 504 meetings, and no steps should be taken to discourage that recording, in order to maintain compliance with the law. This would include office staff who may field calls from parents regarding recording meetings, and staff members who will participate in IEP or Section 504 meetings.
• The new ability to record will likely change the landscape regarding due process complaints and child complaints, as parental recordings will likely be used as exhibits in those hearings.
• Because the recordings made by the parent will be the property of the parent, and the school’s recording will be a student education record, they will be able to publish the recording if they choose to—including on social media. Staff should understand the district’s expectations for their behavior as outlined in the district’s staff conduct policy, including communicating professionally with parents and patrons of the District.
• Given that these recordings will likely be used in dispute resolution processes, or could even spur such processes, it will be important for staff to be trained on and fully understand their roles in IEP and Section 504 meetings, as well as the process for those meetings.
• Preparation for an IEP or Section 504 meeting is always important, but it will become even more important in a meeting in which a parent plans to record, to help prevent missteps during the meeting that may later be brought to light in a complaint.

Here is some of the text from Fox C-6’s current version of Policy KKB - AUDIO AND VIDEO RECORDING:

Recording of Meetings

The Board of Education prohibits the use of audio, visual or other recording devices at meetings held pursuant to the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) or Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as well as other meetings among district employees and between district employees and parents/guardians. Exceptions to this prohibition will be made only in accordance with Board policy and law. Requests for such exceptions must be made within a reasonable period of time prior to the scheduled meetings. This prohibition does not apply to conversations held within view of district security cameras.

Secretive Recording or Transmission

The district prohibits secretive recordings where persons involved do not consent to the recording and it is not otherwise obvious that recording equipment is present or being used, unless the superintendent or designee determines in rare circumstances that such recordings are necessary for educational or security reasons. The district prohibits the simultaneous electronic transmission of any conversation by any person to a third party without the consent of all involved in the conversation, even if the conversation is not recorded.

Below is a link to an article from Missouri Disability Empowerment (MoDE) regarding the passage of the new law.

https://www.moempower.com/recording-policy

The article notes that Missouri is a one-party consent state. I've noted this fact in previous articles on my blog.

The article on the MoDE website includes a must-read letter that was recently sent to the Moberly School District by the Missouri Attorney General’s. The letter from the AG was written in response to a parent who reached out to MoDE for help in their request to record a meeting. The parents were asked to sign a “Request to Record IEP/504 Meeting” form that limited or restricted the parent’s right to record meetings in which they were a participant.

I highly recommend reading the AG Letter Regarding Recording that’s noted in the link below. It references the new law and puts the district on notice.

In 2010, Fox C-6 admins and their attorneys were aware that Missouri was a one-party consent state.

In 2010, some Fox C-6 administrators secretly audio recorded a phone call with one of our allergists in an attempt to try and discredit another allergist. What was really odd, was that the phone call with the allergist that Fox was attempting to discredit was only documented with handwritten notes taken by Fox’s former Section 504 Coordinator, Dan Baker. The audio recording of the phone call was submitted as evidence by the district in our 2010 Due Process Hearing.

If audio recordings of both phone calls had been submitted as evidence, then there would have been an accurate account of what was discussed during both phone calls. Handwritten notes of a phone call should not be trusted as an accurate record of a phone call during a Due Process Hearing.

The new law will hopefully deter school district administrators, staff and attorneys from making false statements during Section 504 meetings like we experienced. It’s less likely that this sort of behavior will continue under the new law when everyone is aware that the meeting is being recorded.

Fox C-6’s School Board Policy KKB - AUDIO AND VIDEO RECORDING

Alleging Retaliation on Behalf of Students with Disabilities from AmericanBar.org

Below is a link to an article with one of the best written and most important paragraphs that I've read on retaliation as it relates to Section 504 law that I found on the American Bar Association website.

I found the article after being contacted by a parent recently who withdrew her child from our school district due to retaliation. She wasn't the first parent in our district to do so.

The Conclusion paragraph from the article does a very good job of stating what can happen in a school district when your school board doesn't do its job of proper oversight of school district administrators. It's what happened at Fox during the Critchlow era and the mishandling of Section 504 issues in our school district. It's also the reason that led to the ousting of a former superintendent and her husband and the demotion of a former district 504 Coordinator / assistant superintendent and another assistant superintendent. It also led to the ousting of the law firm and a state audit of Fox's school district finances.

All school board members past, present and future should read the paragraph below as well as the full article on retaliation. I spent a number of years reaching out to Fox's school board members for help but very little was done until online defamatory posts were traced to school district administrator's homes in our district. I had mentioned it numerous times to Fox's school board members over the years but was ignored.

The 2019 American Bar Association article covers retaliation in Section 504. It's something that I'm very familiar with and have had years of first hand experience dealing with school district attorneys, an elementary school principal, assistant superintendent and Section 504 Coordinator as well as Fox's former superintendent. I've also witnessed first hand the lack of enforcement of Section 504 law by the Kansas City U.S. Department of Education's Office for Civil Rights.

Section 504 law and Fox's school board policies prohibit retaliation. However the law and board policies must be enforced or there's no reason to have them in the first place.

Below is the Conclusion from the 2019 American Bar Association article on Alleging Retaliation on Behalf of Students with Disabilities:

CONCLUSION

"Retaliatory conduct of teachers and school administrators can have lasting consequences on families. When schools inhibit parent advocacy, they risk not meeting the disability-related needs of the child, leading to lack of progress and, in some instances, medical and psychological harm. Actions that criminalize parent advocacy through truancy referrals, seeking civil restraining orders, filing false abuse or neglect claims, or taking other acts to “push out” the family from the school have reverberations in the community and dire consequences for the family. Public schools must accept and work with all children and all of their caregivers, regardless of how difficult it might be. Thus, severe actions against those they serve should be taken as a last possible resort and only after there is a review of all policies and procedures, teacher training, and a proactive attempt at parent engagement, and finally, only if it is for a legal, legitimate, and nonretaliatory reason.

Bringing forth viable and strong claims of retaliation will promote change because it will force schools to assess their behavior, return to parents and students the power to assert their rights, and inform and educate the courts and public that disability-based discrimination in public schools is a continuing problem. However, retaliation claims must be strictly alleged and meet the evidentiary standard to be successful."

Alleging Retaliation on Behalf of Students with Disabilities

AmericanBar.org

Changing Your School District's Culture Is Not An Easy or Fun Task!

As school board elections are approaching again on Tuesday April 6th, I’ve been looking back at some of the articles I’ve written over the past 10+ years covering some of the issues in the Fox C-6 School District that needed to be addressed.

School board candidates could learn a lot about just how difficult it is to change the deep rooted culture of a school district and how much push back a person can get when asking for change.

Cease and Desist Letter

In August 2012, I was sent a cease and desist letter for my efforts to bring about more transparency at Fox and bring Fox into compliance with Section 504 Law. In the spring of 2013, three more parents in our school district were sent cease and desist letters. An article was written about the cease and desist letters in the St. Louis Post Dispatch. 

Defamatory Posts For Speaking at Board Meetings

Then there were the defamatory comments posted online about me that were traced to some of our administrator’s homes and a cell phone. The online posts would appear within hours of making Public Comments at a Fox C-6 school board meeting.

The St. Louis Post Dispatch article linked below covers the cease and desist letters that Fox C-6 sent to parents in the district.

The article notes that former superintendent, Dianne Critchlow said:

 "everyone has the right to criticize the district but not spread untruths"

From the get go in dealing with our former superintendent, she made false statements at one on one meetings, board meetings and in emails to me and our school board and even in the news, which have been well documented.

The Post Dispatch article also noted the following quote from former superintendent, Dianne Critchlow:

"You don’t have the right to make up lies and defame someone’s character,”

Apparently, the statement above did not apply to her or her husband.

Our former superintendent should have been more interested in improving transparency and following federal law instead of anonymously posting defamatory comments online that were directed at parents who were trying to hold her and our school board accountable.

Letters sent to Fox dissidents highlight school tensions

STLTODAY.COM

School Board Members Associated With 504 Issues in the District

It’s interesting to note that 5 of our current school board members were either directly involved with some of the issues I was addressing in our school district or are related to individuals who were directly involved with those issues such as the removal of a 504 Plan and efforts to get the 504 Plan reinstated. It prompts the question as to why these individuals decided to run for a position on the Fox C-6 Board of Education.

No Audio or Video Recordings of Meetings at Fox

I asked the Fox C-6 school board numerous times over the years during the Critchlow era to audio or video record school board meetings because of the lack of detail Fox's board meeting minutes.

Fox C-6 school board meetings had been audio recorded prior to Dianne Brown Critchlow's time as superintendent. She couldn't explain why they weren't recorded anymore. She said the last time they were recorded was when Jim Chellew was superintendent.

Examples Of What Other Districts Were Doing Compared to Fox

I brought numerous examples to our school board of what other school districts in our area were doing with regards to audio or video recording school board meetings and posting school district bill payments online for the community to review. I asked for audio and video recordings of board meetings because the public wasn’t getting the truth or the facts about several issues in our district. At the time, Fox didn’t post bill payments on the district website which made it difficult for anyone in the community to help with oversight of school district spending. It also made it very easy for some of our administrators to misuse taxpayer dollars.

The responses from our superintendent are well documented in the articles I've written over the years. The article linked to below was posted a year before the ousting of Critchlow and her husband and the demotion of two assistant superintendents. It serves as a good reminder as to how bad things can get when there’s very little oversight by your school board and district employees fear retaliation from administration.

11 Years To Comply With an ED OCR Resolution Agreement

In May 2009, Dan Baker signed a Resolution Agreement in which Fox agreed to update the district’s 504 manual by June of 2009. It wasn’t until May 10, 2020 that Fox’s 504 manual was finally updated and posted on the district’s website. It took Fox more than 11 years to update the district’s 504 manual. It's hard to comprehend, but very well documented.

Kansas City ED OCR Slowed the Process As Well

It took Ed OCR nearly 16 months just to respond to the district with their review of the district’s updated 504 manual. 

Ed OCR had already reviewed the document in 2018 and asked for a few minor changes to the document in the fall of 2018. During that 16 month delay, I made several calls to the Ed OCR attorney who was listed as the contact person for the 2018 Resolution Agreement.

In the summer of 2019, the OCR attorney told me that their office was understaffed but they hope to complete their review of the 504 Manual prior to the start of the 2019-2020 school year. Of course, that didn’t happen. OCR didn’t notify Fox until February 2020 that their recent changes to the 504 manual finally met the terms of the May 2009 and 2018 Resolution Agreements.

ED OCR Failed Students At Fox For More Than a Decade

It would be safe to say that ED OCR’s enforcement of the May 2009 and March 2018 Resolution Agreements with Fox probably wouldn’t have happened if I hadn’t kept calling OCR’s directors and attorneys for more than a decade checking on the progress of their enforcement of the Resolution Agreements. It’s a great example of just how easy it is for school districts to get around Section 504 law for years.

I need to write about my conversation with the ED OCR attorney in May 2020 when I asked her why it nearly a decade to complete a simple District Wide Compliance Review and why OCR wasn't following their case processing manual to bring about enforcement.

In the meantime, a lot of legal fees were billed to the district for responses to OCR requests and refusals by district attorneys to change the language in school board policies and the district’s 504 Manual as requested by OCR.

There were also legal fees for 504 meetings, Due Process Hearings and for helping with a "press release" article that appeared in the Post Dispatch in August 2010 after our Due Process Hearing as well as legal fees charged for reading my blog.

In all, Fox spent more than $100,000 in legal fees between 2008 and 2020 because of the removal of a 504 plan and subsequent refusal to reinstate that 504 plan. The amount of legal fees is based upon my review of bill payment records posted online and obtained via Sunshine Requests. The tactics used and the amount of effort to get around Section 504 law was quite amazing.

Superintendent Dr. Nisha Pitel has done a great job over the past couple of years highlighting our staff and students. I was very disappointed when she announced that she would be leaving our district.

Superintendent Dr. Fregeau's Meet and Greet Presentation to the Community

At the same time, I'm very encouraged by the choice of Dr. Paul Fregeau as Fox's next superintendent after watching his meet and greet presentation on Fox's YouTube channel as well as what I found and read on the Decatur Public Schools website. I highly recommend watching Dr. Fregeau's meet and greet presentation.

One significant point during Dr. Fregeau's meet and greet presentation was when he spoke about his integrity and promised the community that he would never embarrass the district.

Dr. Fregeau had done his homework and had either read or heard about the problems that had occurred during the Dianne Brown Critchlow era at Fox and the embarrassment she brought to our community and the Fox C-6 School District.

The July 2013 article linked below documents some of the pushback I received for my efforts to improve transparency in our district and hold people accountable. It also puts into perspective just how much has improved since Critchlow was ousted in 2014.

School board meetings weren't audio or video recorded during Critchlow's tenure. I recorded them when I attended and when I spoke during public comments in order to have an accurate record of what was said at the meetings and the responses I received, if any.

Fox Has a New Website But the Same Old Problems

Fox C-6 Voters Approve $40M Bond Issue - ED OCR Ignores Nearly 7 Years of Investigation Data

It's good to see that Fox's $40M Prop P bond issue was passed by voters last week.

Meramec Heights Elementary and Antonia Elementary have long overdue upgrades needed to bring them into ADA compliance.

New School Board Members Elected

Also, congratulations to our new Fox C-6 school board members. It’s interesting to see that we now have 5 people on our school board member who were either directly involved or are related to someone who was directly involved with the 504 issues that I have been following up on since 2008.

ED OCR Did Not Issue A Monitoring Letter for 16 Months What’s also interesting is the fact that OCR did not issue a “monitoring letter” to Fox C-6 for 16 months after the district submitted a “monitoring report” to OCR.

Fox submitted a monitoring report to OCR on December 12, 2018 with the final changes to Fox's 504 Manual. Originally, Fox agreed to update the district’s 504 Manual by June 3, 2009.

OCR didn't send a "monitoring letter" to the district until April 17, 2020 approving the changes that were submitted to OCR in December 2018. I obtained a copy of OCR’s “monitoring letter” from the district a few weeks ago.

OCR's Delay Was Due To Being "Understaffed"

I contacted OCR to find out what caused the delay. Kansas City OCR’s excuse for the 16 month delay was due to their office being “understaffed” and having to work on new complaints and district wide compliance reviews. It's been the same excuse I've heard for years.

What's odd is that OCR told me last July, that they hoped to complete their review of the changes before the start of the 2019-2020 school year.

Parents and Advocates Need To Know How Kansas City ED OCR Handles Complaints

There’s a lot to cover on this ongoing issue. It’s definitely worth the effort documenting how OCR handles complaints. Parents and advocates need to know just how long it may take their school district to comply with Section 504 and how long OCR can drag out a complaint once it goes into the “monitoring” phase after the signing of a Resolution Agreement.

Fox's Compliance Review Would Make A Great Law Student Research Paper

Fox’s District Wide Compliance Review would be a great example for a research paper for law students as to how OCR conducted a Compliance Review. It took 8 years for OCR to perform Fox’s District Wide Compliance Review. It took OCR 8 years investigate whether or not Fox C-6 was providing Individualized Health Plans to students with disabilities instead of Section 504 Plans.

Before OCR completed their investigation and issued any findings, Fox agreed to sign a Resolution Agreement in March 2018 which closed the complaint and moved it into the “monitoring” phase.

OCR Decided Not To Look at What Occurred Prior To 2015

To top it off, OCR also informed me that what occurred in the district between March 2008 and December 2014 related to the 504 issues wasn’t really looked at because so many people had left the district. It just happens that the law firm that was responding to OCR during that time left the district as well. The law firm was released by the district in 2014 during the Critchlow fiasco.

All I can say is, Wow!

Accountability seems to be a thing of the past.

Who's Watching Over The Office for Civil Rights

Fox C-6 Watchdogs Facebook page and Fox's 504 Manual Available to the Public

The FoxC6Watchdogs Facebook page is now accessible to users who aren't on Facebook.

https://www.Facebook.com/FoxC6Watchdogs

Facebook will prompt you to Log In or Create New Account. However, you don't have to Log In or Create a New Account to scroll through and read the posts.

After scrolling through some of the content on the FoxC6Watchdogs page on Facebook, a large window will popup, prompting you to Log In or Create New Account. When that happens simply click on NOT NOW at the bottom of the window to continue reading post on the Fox C-6 Watchdogs Facebook page.

There's been a lot of content that was posted on Facebook that wasn't posted this blog.

It Only Took 11 Years to Update Fox's 504 Manual 

Recently, I wrote on the Fox C-6 Watchdogs Facebook page about Fox finally get their Section 504 Manual updated and approved by the U.S. Department of Education's Office for Civil Rights (ED OCR).

Just about everyone I talk to about what we've dealt with in trying to get changes made in our school district can't believe how long OCR has taken to do their job. OCR claims that they do "vigorous enforcement" of the law. Perhaps they should come up with a better catch phrase.

One statement I heard a lot over the past 11 years from OCR was, "We're hoping to get it done soon." when I would ask them about the March 2010 District Wide Compliance Review investigation. I got the same response when I asked about reviewing the 504 Manual that the district submitted to ED OCR in December 2018.

It took ED OCR five-hundred and one (501) days to do review Fox's 504 manual before issuing a monitoring lettering approving the changes that they agreed to make in the March 2018 Resolution Agreement.

I'm glad that ED OCR didn't tell me, We're hoping to get it done someday., because who knows if Fox's 504 Manual would have ever gotten updated and posted online.

At least for now, Fox's 504 Manual is online and can be downloaded by the public.

Fox's Updated 504 Manual
You can download a copy of Fox's new 504 Manual from the district website using the link below:

Fox C-6's Section 504 Manual

Kansas City Kansas Public Schools 504 Manual

Even though Fox has finally posted their 504 Manual for the public, I highly recommend reading the Kansas City Kansas Public School District's 504 manual for comparison. You can find a copy of it using the link below.

The Kansas City Kansas manual has searchable text as well as many more references and examples regarding Section 504.

Kansas City Kansas Public Schools
Section 504 Manual

Kansas City Kansas Public Schools
Section 504 Parent's Guide

In March 2020, I sent the link to the Kansas City Kansas Public School's Section 504 Manual to Fox's 504 Coordinator because I thought it was one of the best examples of a 504 Manual that I had found to date.

Hopefully, in the near future, Fox will make some improvements to our Section 504 Manual. Some of the things that could be improved are:

• Making it text searchable
• Adding a Table of Contents
• Adding more information about Section 504 Law such as prohibiting retaliation
• Adding more examples of students who qualify for Section 504

ED OCR Resources for Section 504

ED OCR published an excellent Parent and Educator's Resource Guide to Section 504 in Public Elementary and Secondary Schools in 2016.

The Parent and Educator's Resource guide as has 11 scenarios including one about retaliation related to Section 504. This guide was not available in 2008 when we requested a Section 504 Plan from the district.

Typing in the Appropriate Testing scenario entry below reminded me of when the district's attorney gave us an example of what a district doctor may want to do. He gave us an example as reason as to why we may want to revoke our consent to an independent evaluation by the district. 

Under Section 504, school district's are allowed to hire their own doctor's or specialist to do an independent evaluation.

The district attorney's example as a reason to revoke consent was as follows: If the district's doctor decided that they wanted to hang our child upside down by her ankles for 3 weeks and we didn't want them to do that type of a test, we could revoke our consent for the independent evaluation.

The district attorney followed up his example by letting us know that if we decided to revoke our consent to an independent evaluation, then the 504 process would end here and now. I'm hoping that our school district's attorney at the time (May 2009) isn't reflective of what other parents may have to go through when requesting a 504 plan.

This kind of behavior by a school district attorney didn't reflect well on the attorney nor our school district. I've shared that story many times. I can say that it didn't sit well with me. But, that was just the tip of the iceberg.

Scenarios In OCR's Resource Guide to Section 504

• Scenario 1 - Suspected Disability & Evaluation
• Scenario 2 - Suspected Disability & Involvement of Knowledgeable People 
• Scenario 3 - Disabilities in Remission
• Scenario 4 - Appropriate Testing
• Scenario 5 - Timeframes for Evaluation
• Scenario 6 - Disagreement Over Need to Evaluate
• Scenario 7 - Reevaluations and FAPE
• Scenario 8 - Accessibility
• Scenario 9 - Unjustified Different Treatment
• Scenario 10 - Procedural Safeguards
• Scenario 11 - Retaliation

Ultimately, whether or not your child qualifies for a Section 504 Accommodation Plan is up to the 504 Team at your school.

You can download a copy of ED OCR's December 2016, Parent and Educator's Resource Guide to Section 504 in Public Elementary and Secondary Schools using the following link:

ED OCR's Parent and Educator's Resource Guide
to Section 504
in Public Elementary and Secondary Schools

Fox C-6's 504 Manual Finally Updated After 11 Years

On Friday, May 8, 2020 at 10:03PM, I received an email from Fox’s Section 504 Coordinator informing me that Fox updated the district’s 504 manual and posted it on the district’s website. It’s too bad that the updated manual still didn’t meet the terms of the March 2018 Resolution Agreement. I’d like to know who reviewed the changes in the U.S. Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights (ED OCR). It’s taken more than 11 years to make changes to Fox’s 504 Manual and it’s still not correct. Add to that, the fact that you can’t search for text in the new manual. So, parents, staff and administrators are going to waste a lot of time having to read the entire 71 page document to find something unless they have access to optical character recognition software that can turn images of pages into a searchable document. In Friday night’s email, I was informed that Fox had received feedback from ED OCR and that OCR had “approved” the district’s updated 504 Manual. A link to the updated document was included in the email. Here's the link sent to me: https://www.fox.k12.mo.us/departments/special_education Here's a direct link to Fox's webpage where the 504 Manual is listed: https://www.fox.k12.mo.us/departments/special_education/504_manual

Fox's 504 Manual has not been available on the district website until now. Here is a direct link to Fox's 504 Manual in PDF format: (This link may change with updates to the manual.) https://www.fox.k12.mo.us/common/pages/DisplayFile.aspx?itemId=37088403

Fox Originally Agreed To Update 504 Manual by June 2009 Fox’s Section 504 Manual and Procedural Safeguards document was originally supposed to be updated by June 2009 according to a Resolution Agreement that Dan Baker signed with ED OCR on May 1, 2009. Fox didn’t meet that June 2009 deadline. And, when Fox didn’t meet that original deadline, OCR gave Fox a new deadline. And, when Fox didn’t meet that deadline, OCR gave them another deadline and another and another. After a few missed deadlines, Fox refused to make some of the changes they had agreed to. There was a concerted effort to drag this issue out for years. But, before Fox’s 504 Manual was ever updated, the law firm representing the district was canned when the internet scandal became public involving former superintendent Dianne Brown-Critchlow and former 504 Coordinator Dan Baker. However, prior to being canned, the district’s law firm was able to bill tens of thousands of dollars related to the ongoing 504 issues at Fox between March 2008 and June 2014. Getting back to the recently updated Section 504 manual, it’s really interesting that Fox finally got around to updating the 504 manual just one week after I wrote about Fox not updating the district’s Section 504 Manual after 11 years after agreeing to do so. I was quite surprised to see the email from our district’s 504 Coordinator. I didn’t see it until early Saturday morning since it was sent to me at 10:03PM Friday night. I clicked on the link and began reviewing the document to see if the changes had been made as required by the terms of the March 2018 Resolution Agreement. There were at least 3 things that didn’t get updated as agreed to in the resolution agreement. It makes you question who reviewed the change or if the changes were actually reviewed and “approved” by ED OCR. I’ll have to make a Sunshine Request and a Freedom of Information Act Request to see if ED OCR actually approved the changes or not. The March 2018 Resolution Agreement spelled out exactly what needed to be replaced and/or updated in the 504 manual to comply with federal law. It also required including at least two examples of students who would qualify for Section 504. Fox also agreed to increase the amount of time that a parent can file an appeal to a 504 decision from 10 calendar days to at least 90 calendar days. This didn’t get updated in the “approved” Section 504 Manual that was posted on the district website.

The language in Fox’s updated 504 Manual still states: “If a parent, legal guardian or eligible student intends to challenge the action proposed or refused by the District, the parent/guardian or eligible student must file a written request for 504 Due Process Hearing within 10 calendar days from the date of the District’s written notice of the proposed or refused action.” The current name and job title for Fox's 504 District Section 504 Coordinator is not correct. It's no longer the Assistant Superintendent of Human Resources. The address for ED OCR is not correct in the updated 504 Manual as spelled out in the Resolution Agreement. I highlighted the required changes in Fox’s March 2018 Resolution Agreement in the screen capture below that are not correct or needed to be changed. I also highlighted where the changes still need to be corrected in Fox’s 504 Manual in the other screen capture below. Perhaps someday, this will get corrected. QUESTIONS OUR SCHOOL BOARD SHOULD ASK I’m hoping our school board members will ask some questions such as: Why wasn’t the March 2018 Resolution Agreement with ED OCR provided to the school board for review when it was originally sent to the district and signed by former superintendent Dr. Wipke in March 2018? (Your school board is supposed to ensure that the district is following the law and the March 2018 Resolution Agreement covers Section 504 law.) Why wasn’t the updated 504 Manual included in BoardDocs and presented as an action item if it needed to be approved by the school board prior to posting it on the district’s website? Who reviewed and approved the 504 Manual at ED OCR if the updated 504 Manual still didn’t meet the terms of the March 2018 Resolution Agreement? I’m also hoping that our school board requires the district to add language prohibiting retaliation to Fox’s 504 Manual similar to what’s included in the Kansas City Kansas Public Schools 504 Manual. The following language is posted on ED OCR’s website about retaliation on their Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) page which is referenced in Fox’s 504 Manual:

“Retaliatory acts are prohibited. A recipient is prohibited from intimidating, threatening, coercing, or discriminating against any individual for the purpose of interfering with any right or privilege secured by Section 504.”

The Kansas City Kansas Public Schools Section 504 Manual addressed retaliation very well. I highly recommend reading the KCKPS 504 Manual for reference. It’s much easier to read and includes a Table of Contents. I’ll keep you posted on the ongoing efforts to get Fox’s 504 Manual updated to comply with federal law.

Understanding 504 Plans

If you're a parent and your child was medically flagged by your school or school district as someone who possibly needs a Section 504 plan, I highly recommend that you learn about Section 504 before you attend your first 504 meeting. It's important to know what a Section 504 plan is and why it's better than an asthma action plan, allergy action plan, diabetes action plan or an Individualized Health Plan (IHP).

School districts are much more willing to write an Individualized Health Plan (IHP), asthma action plan, allergy action plan or diabetes action plan for your child or student instead of a Section 504 plan. That's because an asthma action plan, allergy action plan or an IHP is not a legally binding agreement with the district whereas a 504 plan is.

You will most likely run into problems when items aren't followed on an IHP, asthma action plan or food allergy action plan. You may end up being told like we were, that the items on "the plan" we were given by the principal were just her notes. She said that they were things that were discussed at the meeting but weren't necessarily actionable items. This was after the fact when things weren't followed that were on the plan that we were given.

That "plan" was provided to us before we knew anything about Section 504 prior to the start of the 2007-2008 school year. Nothing was mentioned about Section 504 in 2007. At the beginning of the 2018-2019, Fox was required to send out notices to everyone in the district informing them of their obligation to Section 504 and child find. The district was required to do so because of the March 2018 Resolution Agreement they signed with OCR. So, everyone in the district should now be aware of Section 504.

Below is an online post from 2005 that's still relevant today. We found the post online after things weren't being followed on the plan that we were given that was not a 504 plan.

Why Not Obtaining a Section 504 for Your Child is a Disservice to Your Child

There is a lot of good information about Section 504 on Understood.org. I posted a link to an article below that will help you better understand Section 504 and how it may be able to help your child/student in their learning environment.

The article on Understood.org is geared towards helping students with ADHD or dyslexia. Section 504 also applies to students with asthma, diabetes, food allergies, seizure disorders and other health impairments. Those specific items were mentioned in the District's March 2018 Resolution Agreement with ED OCR.

I have been following Fox's ongoing efforts to comply with Section 504 and Title II since 2008 when ED OCR got involved. Their efforts to comply are still a work in progress.

Know Before You Go
It's very important that you are knowledgeable about Section 504 before you attend your first 504 team meeting. Typically, school district attorneys don't attend 504 team meetings. But 12 years ago, a simple health plan was written up prior to the start of school at Lone Dell Elementary. There wasn't any referral for a Section 504 evaluation. The plan was referred to as a Health Plan. As mentioned above, school district's are obligated to perform child find and refer students for a Section 504 evaluation if needed.

Knowing the law may help you call out a district attorney like I did when he made false statements about Section 504 in order to sway the 504 team's decision about whether or not our child qualified for Section 504. This was after the district removed a Section 504 plan in September 2008 arguing that it was not needed since there weren't any reactions at school during a 30 day observation period. The proof that the 504 plan should not have been removed, is the fact that it was restored in August 2014 with the help of ED OCR.

In May 2009, after the district signed a Resolution Agreement to hold another 504 eligibility meeting, I called out the district attorney during that 504 meeting when he stated that "episodic and in remission only applies to people with cancer". I said that wasn't true and that he needed to read the law. His response to me was that we weren't there to discuss the law. He said we were there to decide whether or not the student qualified for Section 504. A decision wasn't made at the meeting anyway because Dan Baker wanted to get an independent evaluation which schools are allowed to do. It's a very good tactic for dragging out the process which is why Fox was required to make a change to their 504 Manual from the March 2018 Resolution Agreement.

Educators can't make good informed decisions when they're being misinformed. Those types of tactics certainly make you question the integrity of the individuals involved in the process and leaves you with very little respect for the people or the process.

Understanding 504 Plans

The link below provides a list of differences between Individualized Education Programs and Section 504 plans. The link is from Understood.org:

The Difference Between IEPs and 504 Plans

Another Extremely Bad Decision at Fox C-6!

Parents at Seckman Elementary in the Fox C-6 School District were informed in a letter on December 17, 2014 from acting superintendent Tim Crutchley that an interim principal was being assigned to their school mid-year.

Below is the text from that letter:

Wednesday, December 17, 2014 

Dear Parents,

Earlier this month, it was announced that Ms. Simokaitis would be transferring from her role as principal of Seckman Elementary to an assistant principal role at another elementary school within the district. Again, I wish to take this opportunity to thank Ms. Simokaitis for her work with students and staff during her tenure at Seckman Elementary.

Creating a change in leadership can be difficult in the middle of a school year. Originally, the district planned to select an interim principal from current assistant principals in the district. Upon closer examination of the situation and needs of our students, we decided to explore another option that will prevent disruption and stress to the other elementary buildings.

Effective January 5th, 2015, Assistant Superintendent Dan Baker will be appointed as interim principal of Seckman Elementary for the second semester of the 2014-2015 school year.

Mr. Baker has extensive experience and dedication as an educator and as an elementary principal. His eagerness to take on the responsibilities of interim principal, along with his proven track record of achieving high student success as an elementary school principal, demonstrate he is the best option for Seckman Elementary students and families.

A permanent successor for the 2015-2016 school year will be hired through an extensive interview process during Spring 2015. Although his start date as superintendent with the district is not scheduled to begin until July 2015, Dr. Wipke plans to be engaged and involved in the process of selecting and hiring an ideal candidate as the next principal of Seckman Elementary.

As always, student learning is our top priority and expectation. I, along with Mr. Baker, and our talented teachers and staff members, will continue to work hard to ensure this transition is as smooth as possible.

Thank you for your time and understanding.


Sincerely, 

Tim Crutchley
Acting Superintendent

Many people may not know who Dan Baker is. Dan Baker is one of the administrators from the Fox C-6 School District that had online defamatory posts traced back to his home. He and his wife Angela Burns Baker were both put on paid administrative leave by the Fox C-6 school board shortly after it was publicly announced that comments had been linked to their home.

Defamatory Post From the Baker Household

Below is one of the online post that was "associated" with the Baker household on TOPIX.COM. The post below was made just a couple of hours after I spoke at the January 15, 2013 Fox C-6 school board meeting during the Public Comments session.

What's even more impressive about the post below is the fact that I stated during my public comment that night to the Fox C-6 school board and the administrators sitting at the table (which included Dan Baker) that I hoped that no one would post any online defamatory comments after myself and others spoke at the meeting that night.

It's obvious that the Baker "household" didn't respect my request.

01/15/2013 – 9:30PM (local time)
It is amazing how people believe complete nut jobs! Can't believe people would listen to that one crazy guy with the weird eye. I know him from Boy Scouts and he says some really strange things that do not sound right. I am pretty sure he has a closet where he hangs up newspaper clippings of board members and wears clown makeup while cutting up teddy bears. That guy is crazy!

Perhaps educators who are being called out for not properly doing their job and spend numerous hours and legal fees trying to get around Section 504 Law find it therapeutic to post online comments about parents who are calling them out. However, I don't condone posting things online that aren't true and defamatory because they can be traced. 

By the way, Mr. Baker doesn't know me from scouts. He knows me because he was Fox's Section 504 Coordinator. I've never seen him at any scouting events. Although Mr. Baker did make a payment using his school district VISA credit card to a STL BOY SCOUTS OF AMERICA on April 7, 2011 for $100. Perhaps it was a donation.

Anyway, I would have to say that claiming to know me from scouts is not an honest statement. What does that say about integrity?

It's certainly NOT the type of behavior that I would expect from a dedicated educator.

I'm a parent who has learned a lot about Section 504 Law over the past 6+ years. I've learned what educators are supposed to do and not do with respect to that law. You expect people to do the right thing and follow the law but that doesn't always happen.

I've spent thousands of hours emailing and speaking with parents in our district, school board members, school employees, retired school employees, attorneys, attorneys at ED OCR, attorneys at USDA OCR, attorneys at the U.S. Department of Justice, Senators, Congressman, state representatives, state senators and parents across the country on the subject. So, I've gained quite a bit of knowledge on the subject over the years. It took 6 years for the district to properly recognize students that qualify for Section 504.

I've documented and written quite a bit about my experiences on this subject. All of my research led me to discover even more problems occurring in our school district which has been nationally publicized. This is definitely not what I was planning on doing for the past 6+ years. But, it has certainly helped reshape our school district over the last several months. Some of our remaining administrators are simply having a tough time dealing with it all and are twisting things however they can to keep from losing their jobs.

So, I'm sure there are probably many parents in our school district that still aren't aware of all of the problems that have transpired over the last several years in the Fox C-6 School District. They may think that having an assistant superintendent step in as an "interim" principal may seem like a good thing especially with all of the experience that was touted by Mr. Crutchley about Mr. Baker in his letter to Seckman Elementary parents. However, you have to weigh Mr. Baker's experience against the facts of what Mr. Baker's "household" posted online during off hours.

Never mind the fact that Fox C-6 is a National District of Character and there all of those "Character Traits" that our school district employees and school board members have agreed to uphold like Honesty, Integrity and Respect as they set the example for our students and our community.

Baker Did Not Apologize!

I want to point out the fact that Mr. Baker pretended to apologize to the public for being linked to comments made online at the August 4, 2014 Fox C-6 school board meeting.

Mr. Baker and his wife didn't really apologize for posting the online defamatory statements. Mr. Baker apologized for the fact that his household was associated with the statements.

Dan Baker more or less said he was sorry for getting caught!

He also sounded nervous for having to read his statement to the public.

Listen to Dan Baker's Public Statement

Below is a transcript of what Mr. Baker read aloud at the August 4 board meeting.

To the Fox school board and the school community

On behalf of my wife and myself, I would like to this opportunity to publicly express my sincere regret that the Baker household was associated with the recent unrest caused by posts to an internet forum. Even a cursory connection to such events is unacceptable to both of us and is outside of our personal and professional standards. 

We appreciate the Board’s willingness to weigh our combined 34 years of service to the Fox school district as they adjudicate this matter. Most regrettable is the time and energy diverted from the business of educating students in order to deal with the issue. We are grateful for this opportunity to continuing serving this community and look forward to focusing our attention on meeting the needs of our students and their families.


Thank you.

I've had the personal experience of having to deal with Mr. Baker in his professional duties as the former Fox C-6 Section 504 Coordinator for the school district for 6+ years. Knowing Mr. Baker and having to interact with him, I certainly don't believe that Mr. Baker should be appointed as the interim principal at Seckman Elementary. That's just my opinion based upon my own experience of dealing with Mr. Baker.

Most people believe that the Bakers should have been fired and so do I. 

I can tell you that Section 504 law states that it is a violation of the law to retaliate against parents for advocating for their children and others. Perhaps ED OCR or USDA OCR don't consider making defamatory comments in online forums about parents is retaliatory in nature because it's considered "freedom of speech". USDA OCR didn't have anything substantial to act on until we were able to send them court documents such as our defamation lawsuit once names were named.

However, if everyone knew everything that's gone on behind the scenes at Fox over the last 6 and a half years as we dealt with the both the U.S. Department of Education's Office for Civil Rights and the USDA's Office for Civil Rights in our efforts to get the Fox C-6 School District to properly follow the law to which Mr. Baker was expected to uphold, you may have a better understanding of things.

Needless to say, I believe the community needs to step up and take action by emailing your current school board members and acting superintendent Tim Crutchley about this recent decision. You need to let them know that this decision is unacceptable.

Mr. Baker should not have even been considered for this position.

Dedication and Perseverance are really good character traits to follow when dealing with these types of issues!

Below is the list of character traits from Guffey Elementary's webpage. 

Perhaps Mr. Baker should have had a framed copy of them hanging in his office or at his house to remind him of what he was expected to follow.

Mr. Baker failed miserably in upholding the Character Education traits that our district has touted for so long. Impressionable students and the community are being taught the wrong thing with all of the incredibly poor decisions in the recent months.

Character Education Words

Cooperation	To work together as a team and allow others to voice their opinion
Responsibility	Being accountable for your own actions
Respect	Demonstrating good manners toward self, others, authority, and property
Peace	Working calmly and cooperatively with others
Caring	Showing kindness, courtesy, and compassion towards others
Dedication	Always working hard to achieve your goals
Integrity	Doing the right thing, even when no one is looking
Honesty	To tell the truth no matter what the outcome may be
Positive Attitude	Always looking for the bright side of any situation
Trustworthy	Taking responsibility for ones choices and commitments
Perseverance	Remaining dedicated to an idea or task and never giving up
Loyalty	To be a reliable and dependable friend