LITCHFIELD – School officials are once again facing accusations that they are illegally restricting access to special education services six years after the district lost a court case involving similar claims.

In the midst of a fight to keep their 9-year-old son enrolled in special education services, John and Leanne McInerney said they have found the School District’s special education policies do not meet federal regulations.

The couple provided a copy of a form used by the district since 2008 they say has made it more difficult for students to qualify for special education services in the Litchfield School District.

Superintendent Elaine Cutler confirmed the New Hampshire Department of Education is looking into the district’s special education policies.

“At this point, we believe there may be some (deficiencies),” Cutler said. “We are investigating that, with the state department’s help.”

State Department of Education representative Stephen Berwick declined to comment and offered no timetable for the investigation.

As part of their argument, the McInerneys point to several years of declining special education enrollment in town.

New Hampshire Department of Education reports show the number of children with disabilities dropped 26 percent from 2005 to 2010, more than five times the drop in overall student enrollment.

However, Cutler said the number of children with disabilities rose significantly this school year, from 120 to 146 students.

Checklist challenged

The form the McInerneys are challenging is a checklist used to identify specific learning disabilities. It helps to determine if a student is eligible for special services.

According to federal regulations, children qualify for special services if they are not making enough progress to meet age- or state-approved standards, or if they exhibit “a pattern of strengths and weaknesses in performance, achievement, or both.”

The current Litchfield form requires a child to meet both criteria, rather than just one, and thus makes it more difficult for students to receive special services. McInerney said the Litchfield form has “and” where the federal regulations has “or,” which he said is a crucial difference.

Special education data from the state Department of Education indicate the form may have had an effect when the district first started using it.

In 2008, the first year the form was used, Litchfield’s graduation rate for students with disabilities dropped to 71 percent, down from 81 percent in 2007. Its dropout rate for students with disabilities rose to 7.3 percent, up from 3.8 percent the previous year, according to state reports.

The issue was first brought to the district’s attention by the McInerneys, who met with administrators and school board in nonpublic session on Oct. 26 to discuss their son’s special needs in school.

John McInerney said the district was trying to remove their son’s Individualized Educational Program, or IEP, because it was judged no longer necessary.

An IEP is uniquely designed for each child with a learning disability.

It can include extra help in the classroom, professional aides or one-on-one teaching in a closed setting, among other things. Each IEP is updated and regulated every three years as the student progresses.

The McInerneys said their son, whose name they preferred to keep anonymous, has been on an IEP since he was 3 years old. He has a reading comprehension processing disorder and still suffers in a variety of subject areas, they said.

“He understands black and white, but he doesn’t understand gray,” John McInerney said.

The disability would be worse if his son’s IEP was removed and he had no additional help, he said.

“He likes school when he does well, but when he struggles he feels left behind and he hates it,” John McInerney said of his son. “I want him to like school and learn and have a proper education.”

“The whole thing is turned upside down in Litchfield,” he said. “It makes it almost impossible for a child to be identified with a disability. We think there’s some things here that they really need to address.”

Cutler said she could not speak about individual cases due to student confidentiality.

“If, in any instance, the district made errors, we will make great steps to rectify the process,” Cutler said.

District sued in 2005

This isn’t the first time Litchfield has been challenged by parents who have argued the district wasn’t meeting its special education obligations.

The School District was previously challenged on its special education policies in 2005. Another family in Litchfield successfully sued the district for its decision to remove their son from special services.

The state at first sided with the School District in 2004, but U.S. District Court Judge James Muirhead overturned the decision in favor of the family.

Muirhead said the district applied the wrong standards to the situation and ordered the district to pay $64,886 in legal fees to the family.

“A finding that a child is performing at an average level on the regular curriculum for his grade does no more than show that the intent of specially designed instruction is being accomplished,” Muirhead wrote in the court decision, adding later, “The evidence in the record supports a finding that (the boy’s) performance in the average range on the general curriculum was dependent on special education services.”

McInerney said the district was shocked when he brought up the case at the October nonpublic meeting.

“When we made a reference to the court case and made similarities to our son’s case, the looks on their faces were almost horrified,” McInerney said. “The court said the school was in violation, and now they’re doing the same thing again.”

John McInerney said he doesn’t know why the district changed the form, but pointed out that doing so could save the district money.

“The more children you have on IEPs, you require more staff,” he said. “The more staff, the more cost to the town.”

Ronda Gregg, director of special education for Litchfield, did not return messages seeking comment.

Others claimed problems

McInerney said there are other families who have had problems with the district’s special education policies, and several moved out of Litchfield to avoid further frustration.

“The school is losing sight of what’s important here,” McInerney said. “The issue is our son and his education and what’s best for him.”

Former Litchfield resident Kelly O’Neil sold her house at a loss and moved to Londonderry in 2008 after struggling to keep her son on special services for several years, she said.

O’Neil said Gregg began talking about removing her son’s IEP when he was in kindergarten. In the years that followed, O’Neil only grew more frustrated.

“I wasn’t going to fight them every year,” she said, referring to the district.

Her son is now 9 years old and enrolled in the Londonderry School District. O’Neil said the services are phenomenal there.

Her son now has a classroom aide to help him with his pervasive development disorder, which was diagnosed at age 2, she said.

“He’s doing excellent with the support he needs,” she said. “It’s one of the best decisions I’ve made in my life.”

O’Neil is now an advocate for parents who have children with disabilities. She went back to school and completed programs at Rivier College and University of Massachusetts to receive a master’s degree in special education.

“The good thing about me being in Litchfield was that it prompted me to help other kids that need help,” O’Neil said. “It opened my eyes that kids really need the help, and I’m trying to learn as much as I can and be able to stand up for the kids that need help.”

Cameron Kittle can be reached at 594-6523 or ckittle@nashuatelegraph.com. Also check out Kittle (@Telegraph_CamK) on Twitter.