Return to main IEP Online page
Updates:
October 2: Workflow, Improvements & Training Advisory Group
District and ESD staff met with PCG and WSIPC to continue identifying workflow barriers, reviewing proposed improvements, and discussing training and support needs in IEP Online 3.0.
The group received updates on several items raised during previous meetings. Specifications have been completed for changes to how consent is obtained and recorded for reevaluations and assessment revisions, and development has begun to separately track IEP meeting dates and implementation dates. A type-in search is also being added to key service lists to reduce scrolling.
Participants asked for realistic implementation timelines and easily accessible follow-up information as changes move forward. The group also discussed the challenge of relying on individual advisory-group representatives to distribute updates within their regions or organizations. WSIPC and PCG will continue considering how outreach and engagement can better support broader district awareness and participation.
IEP Services Description
The IEP Services Description field is now active for all sites. Individual sites may request that the field be deactivated through a support ticket.
Participants asked for confirmation of the field’s character limit and additional clarification about how it functions for transfer and non-transfer IEPs. The group also asked the project team to confirm whether the field fully supports Safety Net submissions without requiring districts to amend or rewrite IEPs.
Contact Log Filter
The group reviewed a proposed enhancement that would default the Contact Log to the current calendar year, allow users to select one or multiple years, and continue sorting entries by contact date.
Participants supported making the log easier to navigate but questioned whether the filter should be based on school year rather than calendar year. The project team will determine whether a school-year configuration is feasible and report back to the group.
Referral to Evaluation
The group reviewed a proposed change that would simplify referral recommendations to two options: proceed with an evaluation or take no further action.
Participants did not support the proposal as presented, noting that district practices vary and that Section 504 or student-intervention processes may occur outside IEP Online or before information is entered into the system. Suggested alternatives included options such as “Proceed to Special Education Evaluation,” “Refer for 504,” and “No Further Action,” while preserving flexibility for local processes.
The project team will review the feedback before determining next steps.
IEP Modifications
The group reviewed a proposed change that would retain a drop-down list of common modifications while adding a free-text option for district- or student-specific entries.
Participants generally supported restoring this flexibility but did not identify it as a higher priority than other workflow concerns currently affecting districts. They also emphasized that custom language must transfer into IEP documents as readable text rather than codes and asked that reporting implications be considered before implementation.
Secondary Transition Workflows
Participants raised several concerns related to secondary-transition workflows, including repeated support-ticket intervention needed to finalize postsecondary goals, difficulty producing summaries of performance, and delays affecting compliance reporting, training, and corrective-action work.
Additional concerns included unresolved spell-check issues, questions related to testing accommodations, and service matrices that may not transfer accurately.
The project team will review the related support tickets, clarify the status and expected resolution of these issues, and bring them forward for additional investigation and discussion.
What happens next: The project team will continue reviewing the proposed workflow changes and feedback from the group, provide follow-up on unresolved technical and configuration questions, and return with additional information on implementation feasibility and timing.
October 2: User Permissions & Roles Advisory Group
District and ESD staff met with PCG and WSIPC to continue work on user roles, permissions, and access in IEP Online 3.0.
The group reviewed several recently implemented permission updates that grew out of earlier advisory-group discussions. These include expanded access to certain IEP information, additional student-transfer functionality for designated roles, broader access to student notes within assigned schools, document-language editing permissions for designated users, and adjustments to compliance notifications to better reflect user caseload responsibilities.
Participants were also informed that an updated User Permissions Reference Guide and compliance notification documentation are now available through system administration resources to help districts review role-based access and permission settings.
The group then discussed additional questions related to inactive student records. Members asked whether certain users should be able to enter or access notes for inactive students. The project team will review the current system configuration and provide additional information before the group considers any recommendations.
Participants also discussed challenges associated with managing large numbers of inactive student records, particularly when student status information does not align between district source systems and IEP Online. Districts were encouraged to use established support channels when specific records or status discrepancies require investigation.
What happens next: The project team will continue reviewing the inactive-student access questions raised by the group and provide additional information for future discussion. The advisory group will continue identifying permission and workflow issues where district experience can help inform system configuration, guidance, and future improvements.
September 25: User Permissions & Roles Advisory Group
District and ESD staff met with PCG and WSIPC to continue improving how user roles and permissions work in IEP Online 3.0.
The group focused on making sure staff can access the information they need to do their jobs while still protecting student information. Members reviewed several areas where current permissions may be creating barriers or confusion, including access to inactive student records, reports, student transfers, notifications, student notes, document language, and service information. The group’s overall purpose is to make sure access rules better reflect the real responsibilities of district staff.
The group reached agreement on several changes. These include expanding access to inactive student records for certain user groups, making reports available through My Reports while continuing to limit results to information each user is allowed to see, and giving districts more flexibility in how student-transfer request and approval access is assigned. These topics build on work from the September 18 meeting.
The group also identified several areas that need more follow-up, including access to mastery criteria, differences between reporting in IEP Online 2.0 and 3.0, and situations where information from older IEPs is not appearing as expected in 3.0.
What happens next: PCG will make the approved permission and notification changes, update related guidance and documentation, and continue reviewing the remaining access and workflow questions raised by the group.
The advisory group will continue meeting as this work moves forward.
September 23: Compliance & Reporting Advisory Group
District and ESD practitioners met with PCG and WSIPC to continue focused work on reporting, compliance, service lists, and the connections between evaluation and IEP service information in IEP Online 3.0.
The group reviewed recent service-list updates and discussed how system naming requirements affect district workflows. PCG reported that list updates will occur approximately twice each week and that a type-in search feature is being developed to make growing service lists easier to navigate. Members also discussed Medicaid-related services and provider visibility, with additional guidance and review underway.
A significant part of the discussion focused on how evaluation areas connect to IEP service selections. Members identified concerns about exact-name matching, information carried forward from prior records, and the potential for incomplete or inaccurate information during transition. PCG presented an option that would allow districts to temporarily disconnect these linkages during the first implementation year. The group agreed that this should remain a district-level choice while additional short- and long-term solutions are explored.
The group also discussed whether IEP Online should add a Delivery Method field distinguishing direct and indirect services. Members raised concerns that adding the field could create additional confusion and did not recommend moving forward with that approach at this time.
What happens next: District and ESD representatives will continue providing mission-critical service-list requests and examples of evaluation-to-IEP linkage impacts. PCG will continue service-list updates, provide additional Logging Wizard guidance, complete its Medicaid review, and bring additional options to the group for consideration.
Next advisory meeting: Wednesday, September 30, 1–2 p.m. The group will continue discussion of accommodations lists, state testing lists, evaluation and IEP linkages, and data and reporting.
September 18: User Permissions & Roles Advisory Group
District and ESD practitioners met with PCG and WSIPC to begin focused work on whether IEP Online roles and permissions match the work users need to perform in their districts.
The group’s work centers on identifying access and permission barriers, clarifying role definitions and configuration needs, and determining what information and functions different district roles need to create, review, approve, or manage. The goal is not simply broader access, but access that reflects actual district responsibilities while protecting sensitive student information.
The work also recognizes that permission concerns may have different causes and may require different responses—such as a technical correction, configuration change, clearer role definition, workflow adjustment, additional guidance, or a policy decision. Changes will ultimately need to be validated by whether district users can successfully complete the work their roles require.
What happens next: The group will continue identifying district use cases and priority barriers so that district experience can inform remediation, testing, and validation. No final remedy is being reported from the first meeting.
Next advisory meeting: Friday, September 25, 1–2 p.m. The group is scheduled to continue meeting weekly on Fridays.
Wednesday, September 16, 2026 - Service Lists Workgroup
District and ESD practitioners met with PCG and WSIPC to discuss Specially Designed Instruction (SDI), Related Services, and Supplementary Aids and Services (SAS).
The discussion made clear that the issue extends beyond missing list choices. Participants discussed statewide consistency and local district needs, individualized service language, legacy records, reporting and compliance dependencies, and the workload created when existing records require correction or revision.
PCG also identified an important data-integrity consideration: changes to the way legacy records are mapped must be approached carefully so work completed by districts in IEPOnline 3.0 is not overwritten. District representatives discussed the need for greater local control and flexibility while longer-term approaches are evaluated.
What happens next: No final remedy was confirmed during the meeting. The discussion and district input will inform continued work on service-list remediation and longer-term configuration.
Next advisory meeting: The User Permissions & Roles group meets Friday, September 18, to focus on access, role configuration, and how permissions can better reflect actual district responsibilities while protecting student information.