Ed_gov_transparent ED.gov - Link to ED.gov Home Page

Note:  This document has been delivered to the Office of the Federal Register but has not yet been scheduled for publication.  The official version of this document is the document that is published in the Federal Register.

benefits or insurance to pay for Part C services. Most commenters, including parents, parent advocacy groups, State lead agencies, and EIS providers, supported proposed

§303.520(a)(1)(iii), which would have required parental

consent for enrollment in a public benefits or insurance

program when a parent is eligible under, but not already

enrolled in, such a program. These commenters maintained that a State should not be able to require a parent to enroll in a public benefits or insurance program, such as Medicaid, as a condition of receiving IDEA Part C services because the act of enrollment could impose costs on parents and families, affect their rights under other Federal

programs, and have an impact on a parent’s credit rating.

However, the vast majority of commenters, including parents, parent advocacy groups, State lead agencies, and

EIS providers, opposed proposed §303.520(a)(1)(i) that

would have required parental consent for using a child’s or

parent’s public benefits or insurance to pay for Part C

services when the child or parent is already enrolled in such a program. Several commenters, including a State Interagency Coordinating Council and a parent advocacy group, recommended that States be required to provide notice to parents in lieu of obtaining parental consent when the child or parent is already enrolled in such a