Skip to content. | Skip to navigation

Personal tools
Log in


You are here: Home / ECATS / Frequently Asked Questions / Special Education

Special Education

If you choose an assessment on the referral/re-eval for example speech screening and eval, but eval is not needed due to student passing screening where is the best place to document this in the software, since you can't go to the specific assessment without putting the assessment itself in?

If both screening and evaluation have been requested and consented to by the parent but after the screening no evaluation is needed, it can be documented in the assessment tab showing that due to passing the screening no evaluation was administered.  It can also be written into the Prior Written Notice to clearly explain what was done.  Also, at the evaluation plan meeting, the user can include in that PWN that the evaluation will only be administered if the student does not pass the screening so that the team understands before any testing begins.


In the list of assessments to choose from on the Assessment Summary screen, there is a Preschool Observation.  There should also be an Observation option for non-preschool students.

Observation can be selected in the Assessment Area dropdown.


In IEP > Services > Related Services, if you check “Supplemental Aids/Services”, then the amount of time is still required.  Frequency should still be required, but not amount of time.

Thank you for your suggestion.  This will take taken into consideration.  Currently, the amount of time will be required for all service delivery.


How do you add outside agency representatives or other outside people (not student’s family members) to an IEP team?  In EdPlan, this is done through the Parent/Student/Reg Ed screen; however, this position does not appear as an option in the Relationship dropdown in ECATS.

We have updated the system with this request.


Shouldn’t the IEP team member positions pre-fill on the document after they have been selected from the workspace?

Each individual form requires documentation of who was present and participated at the meeting.  There may be people on the student's IEP team who are not present at a given meeting.  For example, the OT may be a member of the team, but unable to participate in the meeting due to scheduling conflict.  In this situation, the OT would not be selected on the forms used in that meeting.  Also, different team members may have different roles at a given meeting and would need to be selected rather than populated from the team tab.


The following individuals were present and participated in the referral to special education and IEP Team decision.  (A Request to Excuse Required IEP Team Member9s0 has been obtained if any of the following participants are identified as excused.  Note with an * any team member who used alternative means to participate.

In the textbox "Explanation of team participants/absence of participants (if needed)", you can input a *and type the alternate participant's name. Ex. *Barbara Test - This will document that Barbara participated by alternate means.


The Eligibility Determination can be finalized with a future meeting date.  Is it supposed to function this way?  In what instances would documents from a future meeting be finalized before the meeting date?

The system gives a warning that the user has used a future date.  Generally, documents would not be finalized until after decisions are made by the IEP team at the meeting. 


There is a compliance symbol for transfer students.  What triggers this symbol to appear and disappear?

A full list of compliance symbols and their triggers can be found in the ECATS User Guide located in "Resources" at the bottom of the ECATS dashboard.


Is the section titled local and state assessments where we will document the results from previous evaluations?

Yes - Local and State Assessment Data > Add/Remove Existing Data > Add Assessments.


On the IEP under classroom activities, the only items listed are testing items.  A student may need something for lunch and there is no way to do that.  In order to do a custom accommodation currently, you have to chose an accommodation from the list.  How will we document when students need accommodations outside of testing?

The list of accommodations is subject to change, but if the needed accommodation is not listed, use the custom accommodation text boxes at the bottom of that screen to include what that student needs.


Is there only one district assessment test for district testing?  Students may need different accommodations for different subject areas.

The user can add district assessments based on what the district  administers.


On the Eligibility Determination, a parent is required to sign for procedural safeguards.  What if parent doesn't attend, and you can not get this signed and returned?  Are we okay to proceed with services if we have a signed consent for services and do we just document the attempts to get that section of eligibility determination signed?

These signatures should be collected at the same time.  A parent must know their rights as they give consent for service so that they can understand their procedural safeguards.  

Is the state providing guidance on how to translate old forms into new forms when we are required to input data when the software comes back up?

Now that the system is in live, information has migrated and the details can be found in the student history under the student information tab.  The pdf documents for that information will migrate into the system for all districts if it has not already.  When new actions occur in the school year, the user will be able to begin with that action in the ECATS system.


On the evaluation plan, there is not another option.  How will we specify more specific items such as a Functional Behavior Assessment, differentiate a fine or gross motor assessment, etc. ?

If more specificity is needed about the type of evaluation, the details can be documented in the prior written notice.

The system is designed to not have signatures on the communication worksheet.  Is this okay as we have been told we must have signatures in the past?

Currently, the DPI requires signatures for the consent to evaluate and the consent to provide services.  Individual districts may have other documents for which they require signatures as a local agency may be more defined than the state agency.

Due to the new layout of the program, when inputting present levels and goals, should one present level be developed with all goals needed addressing the present level linked underneath OR should we still continue writing weakness targeted present levels with individual goals for each present level?

When creating an IEP, the team will look at relevant sources of data and the present levels of performance before determining if that area is in need of SDI.  For this reason, it is likely easiest and best to do this based on areas of need, creating the sources of data and present levels for each of the areas of need or that were assessed.  The system will prompt the user to create annual goals based on how these are written and which ones require SDI.  


Can Surrogate be added to the Parent dropdown?

Yes. This has been added.


Is there a way to add an 'other' box on the referral form under the formal assessments to include assessments that do not fit in the defined categories?

Any assessment entered within the Assessment Summary page can be added to the Formal Assessments section of the Review of Existing Data link. For assessments that do not fit in any of the predefined categories, you can always create a custom assessment.



Based on what we do now, why would you have a present level on the IEP and indicated that SDI is NOT needed?

There may be an occasion in which an initial evaluation or reevaluation yields data that do not require specially-designed instruction.  For example, if a speech and language evaluation is completed as part of a suspected disability, but speech and language do not need to be addressed with SDI, the data is included on the PLAAFP but marked not in need of SDI. Evaluations are not only considered for eligibility but also in the development of the IEP; therefore all areas assessed must be reported in the PLAAFP even if it doesn't require SDI.


Also…regarding the impact statement…it appears that there is one impact statement for all areas that repopulates for each present level area.  What if the academic and functional impacts are different for the different areas?  Do you write a multi-sentence impact statement to address each area?



In the Assessment Summary section, we need to be able to list multiple scores or “subject areas” under one assessment.
for instance, in the Behavior Assessment System for Children 3rd Edition (BASC-3) Parent Rating Scales there are at least four composite scores that we need to report for this test: Externalizing Problems Composite, Internalizing Problems Composite, Behavioral Symptoms Index, and Adaptive skills Composite. These are all parts of one assessment, but the way that it is currently set up, you only have the option to add one label - for example, externalizing problems composite -under the details button that says Subject Area. 

The user has two options: list the assessment separately for each subject area or list the assessment once and utilize the narrative box to itemize the scores for different subject areas.


We need to be able to add multiple “Subject Areas” under one assessment.  Right now, in order to get all four in, we’d have to put the test in 4 different times

The user has two options. List the assessment separately for each subject area or list the assessment once and utilize the narrative box to itemize the scores for different subject areas.

Can Implementation Specifics under Accommodations be required so teachers cannot finalize without them?

This is a local decision.


Why would we have an option to excuse the LEA Rep from a meeting?  Can this be removed? What if a district is not going to allow removals from IEP meetings?  Can this feature be removed?

Per the regulations, the LEA Rep can be excused from the meeting if the parents agree in writing and they meet the further conditions of the regulations:(e) IEP Team attendance. (1) A member of the IEP Team described in paragraphs (a)(2) through (a)(5) of this section is not required to attend an IEP Team meeting, in whole or in part, if the parent of a child with a disability and the public agency agree, in writing, that the attendance of the member is not necessary because the member's area of the curriculum or related services is not being modified or discussed in the meeting.  (2) A member of the IEP Team described in paragraph (e)(1) of this section may be excused from attending an IEP Team meeting, in whole or in part, when the meeting involves a modification to or discussion of the member's area of the curriculum or related services, if (i) The parent, in writing, and the public agency consent to the excusal; and (ii) The member submits, in writing to the parent and the IEP Team, input into the development of the IEP prior to the meeting.  When you work through all of the above – you land at “no” they shouldn’t be excused.  However, we wanted to account for the fact that regulations permit it -  instead of making the decision for every occasion by restricting this option at the state level. The thought was that the very time you do this – you would have an exception to that rule.


We were discussing the Prior Written Notice and we have concerns regarding the rejected and refusal section. What is the best way to describe to my teachers the difference between the two when they are creating it?

Please refer to the directions for completing the PWN found on the EC Division website - new forms.


For students with a documented hearing loss, they require a Communication Plan Worksheet.  Where does this go, how is it attached, is there a way to have a reminder for EC teachers to remember to have this completed?

The Communication Plan is addressed within the "Special Factors" link within the IEP Process. If a user answers "Yes" to the question "Does the student have a documented hearing loss?", then a link appears where they can create a Communication Plan. A warning message also pops up to remind them to create a Communication Plan after the question is answered. The IEP cannot be finalized if the hearing loss question is "Yes" and the Communication Plan is not completed. The document is created with the IEP and prints behind it in the PDF. 


Under Meeting purpose and reevaluation -- programming change only. What is this? How is it different from reevaluation?

Reevaluation -programming change only refers to those times that an IEP Team may need to seek consent to conduct a particular evaluation but does NOT suspect a change in eligibility category. This option provides the team the flexibility to conduct the evaluation without resetting the 3-year clock when eligibility is not in question. For more information please refer to the EC Process Modules found on the EC Division website and/or contact your EC Director for the EC Process speaker notes.


Under Exceptional Children process, when it mentions transitions, which transition is it referring to?

Secondary Transition is part of the IEP Process beginning at age 14. Transition can also be a meeting purpose for transitions from Part C to Part B, middle to high school, etc.


In the meeting purpose under IEP, if purpose changes why does everything gets deleted? Can that be revised, please?

This has been disabled for now.


Under: “Progress Reports on IEP goals will be issued in accordance with school report card schedule. If the IEP team determines that more frequent progress reports are needed, indicate the schedule:” this can be a tricky question as it can be difficult for teachers to explain why and when a more frequent report needs to be provided. Can you please provide some guidelines for teacher sin regards to how to handle this question? 

The minimum requirement per policy is that progress reports are issued concurrently with the issuance of report cards. For some students, progress may need to collected and reported more frequently - sometimes per parent request and sometimes because of the rate of progress the student is or is not demonstrating. The frequency of progress reporting assists the IEP Team in determining timely reviews and revisions to the IEP if needed and is an IEP Team decision.


Under accommodations… do we have to have a present level in order to add accommodations for lunch? Recess?  If the student needs to sit pin close proximity to an adult during lunch, do we have to write a present level for that? 



Accommodations populate for all classes. Do all accommodations have to be the same for all classes? If we want to do different accommodations for different areas, can we not do it? 

Different classes can have different accommodations.  If an accommodation is used for a state assessment, it must also be used for district assessments and in classroom assessments/activities.


There are not signature pages anymore. Are we expected to sign next to the names? Initial? Or no signatures are requested?

LEAs can establish their own business rules regarding the requirement of signatures. A signature is only required for the consent to evaluate and the initial consent for placement.


Which signature pages/items does the state want uploaded into the software?
The initial consent to evaluate, the initial consent for placement and the consent to access the student's private insurance. 

The invitation now has a new purpose - Discuss Transition.  Which transition is this referring to (transition section of IEP starting at 14 or transfer from PK to school age, elementary to middle, etc)?

All of the above. This option is not limited to Post-Secondary Transition. 


In the training site, some of the evaluations do not have descriptions for example behavior/emotional evaluation and social developmental history.  Does ECATS have these?

Yes. On both the demo and live sites, there is an evaluation description for social developmental history, this should have printed "A social history documents normal and abnormal developmental and/or medical events and includes a review of information gathered during the screening process. For preschool children, a social history must include an assessment of family composition, support systems, stressors, and environment as they correlate with the child's need or special services."  


On the Eligibility Determination, the first section has four new boxes that basically confirmed what the report does.  There is a fourth question that states additional information required for the determination of specific learning disability.  Why is this disability singled out and is there something different from what has previously been done with SLD since it states additional information?

The SLD policy require that the IEP Team members affirm their agreement with the SLD determination. NC 1503-3.5 Specific Documentation for The Eligibility Determination- (b) Each group member shall certify in writing whether the report reflects his or her conclusion. If it does not reflect his or her conclusion, the group member must submit a separate statement presenting his or her conclusions.


Under eligibility in ECATS, you have three options for purpose.  The third option is reevaluation programming only.  Does this need to be completed since you are not required to do a worksheet and eligibility determination for programming only?

This is something we are working on. Currently, this selection forces a rule of completion for worksheets that is not intended for "Reevaluation -Programming Only". When this is corrected, a notification will be provided in a scheduled release. 


If you are doing a reevaluation with no testing, how does the system operate so that you only do eligibility determination only?  Worksheets would not be needed if testing is not being completed.

If the IEP Team is determining that the reevaluation can be completed without additional testing, the disability worksheet must still be completed to document the review of existing data. This ensures that each of the required components for the disability are documented as current and reliable and continues to support the student's eligibility area.


For interpreter of evaluation results, the gen ed teacher does not come up as an option.  Although at a referral, they could potentially be the one that is providing the majority of the data on the student that is being referred.

Thank you for bringing this to our attention. General Education Teachers can now be selected as Interpreter of Results. 


On the IEP under service delivery, do you put the number of blocks or the length of time for a block?  This could be confusing to staff that thinks in blocks versus time.

The length of time for a block. Also, service delivery is not scheduled based on class length but should be determined based on the student's individual needs. 


Will there be a way to mark students noncompliant/nonfundable in the software?

Yes, the LEA Admin 4 and LEA Data Manager user types will be able to make that designation. 


Since all facilities are not equipped to hold live meetings, will there be a way to create drafts of forms (ex. referral, re-eval, eligibility) so that it does not look like predetermination occurs?  Currently, there is no way to leave the form blank and get all of the info you need in the form.  Plus, the paper forms do not match software or contain all needed components.

Yes. The user DRAFTs the documents for the meeting. The watermark assists in notifying IEP Team members that the documents are a draft and the starting place for the team.


When students transfer out of our LEA, we will need to manually inactivate the student in ECATS?  This is how it worked with EdPlan.  The school data manager withdraws the student from PowerSchool; however, a district-level administrator has to manually inactivate the student in order to remove him/her.

When a student is withdrawn in PowerSchool, that same student will be withdrawn in ECATS with a PowerSchool withdraw code when the overnight file transfer takes place.  You will see the PowerSchool exit in ECATS the following day.  You will need to access that student in ECATS and give them the correct EC Exit Reason.   


In the PSSP, you must answer the question ‘Are any services from the proposed IEP included in the LEA’s proportionate share plan?’.  If you answer “No”, then none of the PSSP links appear.  Does this mean there must be a proposed IEP written before you can write a PSSP?  What if a student has been on a PSSP for years and it’s just an annual review?  Does a team always have to write an IEP first?

The team only has to write an IEP first if this is an initial evaluation or if the parent has expressed an interest in returning to public school. After the initial, the user can go directly to the PSSP tab for data entry. 


For data collection, will there be an alert letting the user know that a Delay Reason needs to be entered?  If so, which user will receive this alert?  Will EC teachers have view-only or edit access to this screen?

Yes,  if 90-day timeline is exceeded for any document, an alert will fire prompting the user to enter a delay reason in order to finalize the document. The user creating the document will receive the alert.


What guidance can DPI give about the Comparable Services Plan and when/how it is expected to be used?

The CSP only documents the entry date of an out of state student with a current IEP. NC State law permits the ability for the LEA to draw down funds for out of state students with a current IEP until the initial eligibility and initial NC IEP is developed. However, this option ends in 90 days.


For in-state transfer students, we were told that the electronic documents will transfer with the student. Does any information remain in the workspaces, or will only the finalized documents transfer over?  Will the transfer process be automatic, or will districts need to request the records for transfer students?

Yes, in-state transfers will occur automatically in ECATS based upon data from PowerSchool. All workspace and finalized documents will transfer with the student. 


Why are there hearing loss-based questions under the special factors section?

Hearing loss has always been addressed in special factors. See policy NC 1503-5.1 (a)(2)(iv). (KH).


On the Parent/Student screen, why and how should you use the “Associate with Existing Parent” button?

If a parent has already been entered into ECATS (ie older sibling), then you can associate or add that parent to another student's record. To do this, click the "Associate with Existing Parent" button, and then search for the parent. Select the correct parent (if there are multiple users that meet the search criteria), and then set the relationship dropdown.


The “Interpreter of Instructional Implications of Evaluation Results” could be the Reg Ed Teacher; however, it is not possible to pull this team member into this dropdown in the team member sections.

Thank you for bringing this to our attention. General Education Teachers can now be selected as Interpreter of Results. 


How does out of state transfer get notated in software?

Once a new record is added, the IEP team can complete a CSP document to cover the student's services until there is time for a full IEP meeting. 


When you add an assessment to this screen and include the provider name when you click “Log” the provider name shows up in every provider dropdown line instead of just the first line.  Is it supposed to function this way? 

Yes, that is the intended functionality. 


Why is there a date on the Assessment Summary screen for each assessment and then you enter a date again on the Log screen?  A date can be entered incorrectly since these two fields do not connect to each other and there is no compliance check for this.  No dates pull into the pdf category worksheet/eligibility document, but the date on the front Assessment Summary screen (not the log screen) pulls into the PWN document.

The Assessment Summary page is a living record that allows users to add and update assessments throughout the student's history. As such, the different dates provide flexibility for users to enter repeated tests within the Log screen. We will submit your feedback regarding dates into the worksheet for review.


On the Consent for Evaluation document, there is no description for Behavioral/Emotional Evaluation. Is this correct? 

Yes, that is correct. 


Test student with a finalized IEP that is current – I tried to create a Progress Report (Reporting Period 1) and received a message that “there is no IEP in effect for this student”

The most common reason for this error message is that the IEP start date is still in the future. The IEP can be compliant, but if the start date has not passed, a progress report cannot be created. 


In Progress Monitoring, when clicking “Save & Confirm” or “Save, Confirm, & Log Another Session” for the data point, the Data Capture Status is showing as “pending approval”. Pending should only appear when the user clicks “Save”. The other options should be “approved” for data capture status.

Currently, the data capture status is showing as "Approved" when "Save, Confirm, & Log Another Session" is selected. If you have a specific student we could review, that would be helpful; however, we are seeing this function as expected.


Where do you put the summary of previous assessments on the reevaluation?

The Resources section can be found at the bottom of the landing page once you log into the system. Click on to ECATS Training Video Suite – Special Education Topics.  Reevaluation Process Review of Existing Data should answer your question. ECATS Training Video Suite -- Special Education Topics are also available on the ECATS website. 


If a team determines that they are continuing eligibility and need no additional assessments how do they proceed since the software requires assessments to be put in on an eligibility worksheet in order to even be able to generate the eligibility determination?

The existing assessment data used to make these decisions must be brought into the worksheet for the disability area. This ensures that during the review of existing data, all required evaluation data for the disability are documented as current and relevant and support continuing the disability category. 


If the team determines formal evaluations are needed, the document shows a line for parent signature with no explanation to reference what the parent signature line is for. Can you provide clarity on this?

The parent has the right to disagree with the team’s decision to not conduct formal evaluations. The show-section function should show you the view below. When this occurs, policy requires that the IEP Team inform the parent that they have the right to request evaluations. The policy that supports this requirement is NC 1503-2.6(d). (d) Requirements if additional data are not needed.   (1) If the IEP Team and other qualified professionals, as appropriate, determine that no additional data are needed to determine whether the child continues to be a child with a disability, and to determine the child’s educational needs, the public agency must notify the child's parents of - (i) That determination and the reasons for the determination; and (ii) The right of the parents to request an assessment to determine whether the child continues to be a child with a disability, and to determine the child’s educational needs. 


If a team determines that they are continuing eligibility and need no additional assessments how do they proceed since the software requires assessments to be put in on an eligibility worksheet in order to even be able to generate the eligibility determination?  

The Resources section can be found at the bottom of the landing page once you log into the system. Click on to ECATS Training Video Suite – Special Education Topics.  Reevaluation Process Review of Existing Data should answer your question.


When completing the PWN, what is the difference between refusals and rejections?

The information for refusals and rejections is found on the EC System web page under the new forms under the Directions section for PWN form. 


Some of our students in Preschool or residential facilities receive communication support through a primary teacher of the student and is on more of a support plan for Speech-Language services, would be marked noncompliant for having a goal for communication and not having designated direct service for the goal?  

Goals and services should be written for what the student needs and will receive during their time in school.  This way the teacher and therapist can have integrated goals and times to work on them (together or separately).


An error message occurs in the system on the referral when the referral is backdated for over a month.  In a situation where we have holidays in the month, this could potentially occur.  Is there a way that date could be allowed to be backdated more?

The date the school receives a referral could be a previous date, but it should not be more than a month prior.  However, we understand that things happen and appreciate your question for consideration.


Due to our preschool settings, a student could be qualified as SI only and receive a full day of EC services in the preschool environment.  Will this be marked as noncompliant when the student receives full day EC services and the student's instruction is primarily from the SPED teacher.  If so, how should that service delivery look (should it be two different lines since two different staff members (speech therapist and preschool teacher may be working on the goals)? 

Goals and services should be written for what the student needs and will receive during their time in school.  This way the teacher and therapist can have integrated goals and times to work on them (together or separately).


What is math comprehension?

Math Reasoning


What is the purpose of the summary assessment page in the IEP Process? What would you add that is not part of the reevaluation process?

The summary of the assessments tab is like the warehouse of all assessments/evaluations that have been done with the student.  From here, the user selects the information to be included in other areas of the process (reevaluation, eligibility, IEP, etc.).  When data is collected in the evaluation process it is then used in the IEP to establish the sources of relevant data used to determine the strengths and needs of the student in the present levels of performance.


Areas assessed on IEP process - Do we include all areas assessed, even if we don't need present level, or should we only include areas that require present level?

Include all relevant areas assessed and the present level of performance for each.  The team will then answer the question of if that area requires SDI.  For example, motor screening may have taken place and would need to be included, but may not require SDI and would therefore not have an annual goal.


Services - Specially Designed Instruction:  What is the purpose of the "Duration" of service?  Wouldn't this be the length of the IEP?

Typically, the duration of services will be the start and end date of the IEP.  However, there are times when a student is transitioning (from one grade to another, from one type of service to another, etc.) and this allows the user to show exactly when the student is receiving a given service.  For example, if the student is receiving 60 minutes of reading service in the general education setting in the fifth grade but will receive 90 minutes of service in the special education setting in the sixth grade, the duration dates will allow for this change during the IEP year.


Are implementation specifics for accommodations required? We can finalize without doing them.  

Yes, they are required for certain accommodations, but others are self-sufficient and do not need further explanation. This is why you can finalize without them.


Eligibility Tab:  Why is there is nothing that says "Create an IEP."

If the student is found eligible an IEP must be created in order for the process to be complete.  Otherwise, the student's compliance symbol will not be a "green checkmark."


Why does service delivery includes the location of HH and residential but you haven't gotten to placement yet?

The continuum of placement is calculated in the background of the system.  


Is the Service Delivery for a semester only?

The service delivery (the way in which students receive SDI) for any part of the IEP may change throughout the IEP year, but there must be service for the entire IEP year.  


Review of Existing Data:  The two sections of observational data, do they require parental consent?

Parental consent for observations is required when the team needs this data to help determine potential eligibility for any suspected area(s) of disability.


Where do we document review of previous formal assessments in the reevaluation process? Where does discussion of most recent evaluations occur?

All assessment data is placed into the assessment summary tab.  Then it is available to be used in the other processes.  So, previous formal assessments can be pulled into the referral or reevaluation report and evaluations requested and consented to by the parent can be included in the eligibility determination.


When using the invite for an outside agency, if after multiple attempts of trying to get that back, can the team proceed with inviting the outside agency or can the outside agency not attend?

When an outside agency needs to be invited to an IEP meeting, parental consent must be collected prior to sending an invitation to the agency.  Once consent from the parent is established, the invitation to the outside agency is sent.  If that agency representative is unable to attend or does not respond to the invitation, the meeting can be held without them.  It is good practice to provide more than one invitation if there is no response and/or to ask the parent or age of majority student to request their presence at the meeting.


Our residential facility does not utilize a regular education teacher.  Currently, in the software, there is no way to finalize a form without designating a regular education teacher.  How do we proceed with this?

Per policy, a general education teacher must be a part of the IEP team.  When appropriate, the district may request that position be excused from the meeting.  See policy NC 1503-4.2 for further information.


Do you have to create an IEP in order to populate the PSSP? 

When a student is initially placed, an IEP should be written to ensure that the parents understand the offering of FAPE from the district.  Once the PSSP has been established and is being reviewed annually, there is no need to draft an IEP unless the parent has an interest in returning to the Public School Unit.


What is the "proportionate share plan" referred to on the PSSP page?

The proportionate share plan refers to how your director has written the district's grant to include funds for students who have been parentally placed in private schools.


Will the assessment list be customizable or is it set by DPI?  If it will be set by DPI, will there be an avenue for LEAs to provide input/feedback?

DPI will update the assessment and intends for it to include the most recent assessments that many districts frequently use.  However, it is perfectly acceptable to use the custom tab in order to include assessments that are not listed.


What do the asterisks before the assessments (on referral page) indicate?  My understanding of training is that it means that parental consent is not required.  If that is the case, there should be directions on the form that indicate what the asterisks mean.

Correct.  The asterisks indicate areas that are required but do not need parental consent.  Thank you for your suggestion that instructions be included to reference this fact.


What is the private school non-participation notice date (on referral data page under timeliness and special situations)?

This refers to the date that a parent notifies the district that they will not participate in the IEP/services for the district or that the student is eligible for an IEP/PSSP but none of the proposed services are in the LEA's current proportionate share plan.


When writing an IEP goal on the test site the criteria for mastery only allows for a number to be placed in the section.  For the Live Site will we be able to put a percentage or something such as 4 out of 5 opportunities?

The annual goal should be written with the appropriate mastery criteria as specified by the team.  This could be a percentage, a number of times out of a number of opportunities, a number of correct words per minute, etc.  Then in the details of that goal, the number only enter so that the system can calculate progress for the progress monitoring feature.  For example, if the goal was 80%, then the mastery criteria box would be 80, or if the goal was 4 out of 5 times, then the mastery criteria box would be 4, etc.  


If a document is finalized with an error that does not match the hard copy document, what is the process for having a document deleted so that the team can re-finalize the document with the correction to match the hard copy?  Another side note, with our previous software, our teachers needed documents deleted on a daily basis and the Data/Software team at the district level handled these requests.  This is a significant need and districts should be able to manage this locally.

There are certain administrative user types that have the ability to delete final documents.


How is back dating handled within the system?  Appears that it can be done in some sections.  Some districts were concerned, especially with the invitation.

Backdating of documents is not advised.


When SLD as a possible eligibility category is selected, it notes that a psychological is required.  Policy change in 2020?

Indeed, there will be updates to correlate the new SLD policy to ECATS processes for the July 2020 changes.  Until that time, however, the policy will remain the same and ECATS will be configured to align with current policy.


If we are able to push a button to have a copy of IEP available for a PSSP, can we have that option for amendments?

When addendum is selected as the purpose of the meeting, the workspace does not clear from the most recently finalized IEP.  That way the teacher may make only the needed changes based on the reason for the addendum.


Under the assessment summary section, what should be the subject area that is put for things like a review of existing data, summary of conferences, etc? Are we putting in just one of the areas of concern or do we have to put in summary of conferences for each area of concern and copy and paste the comments each time?

It would be appropriate to include all areas of concern in order to ensure that all data has been included in the system.  You may wish to select the subject area based on the type of information you are entered, including the topic of conversation for a summary of conferences with the parent.


Will the system be calculating placement on the IEP and where is the location on the IEP for that as it was not demonstrated during training? If placement isn't on the IEP, then how will it be on the child count reports?

Based on the length of the school day and the amount and place of service delivery the system figures the correct placement on the continuum.  This will not be shown on the IEP, but will be used for reporting purposes. 


I have entered standard scores for some of these tests, and they are not showing up on the eligibility worksheets.  Why?

After data is entered into the assessment summary tab, it is available to be used in the other processes but must be selected as information to be included. 


I have a question about RSSD services and documenting this in ECATS. Would it be under the related services and then click the box for "Supplemental Aids / Services / Accommodations / Modifications” or would it be documented differently somewhere else?

You would select that checkbox at the service delivery section of the IEP.  You would document the information in the appropriate place(s) in the IEP that support that service. 


We are concerned that the Reevaluation Plan requires teams to request all information that the individual eligibility categories require. If some of that data is already available, we are not sure why we would need to generate consent to collect it again.

If data is in the summary of assessments tab and has been pulled into the review of existing data for the referral/reevaluation report, the evaluation plan should only require the critical assessment components have not been collected for the suspected disability(ies). 







Document Actions