In special education, time is never just time. It’s access to instruction, support for participation, and the difference between “being present” and truly making progress. That’s the big idea behind Washington State’s Every Minute Counts technical assistance guide: IEP service minutes should be thoughtfully determined, clearly documented, and consistently delivered—because students’ outcomes depend on it.
At TinyEYE, we partner with schools to provide online therapy services (like speech-language therapy and other related supports) in ways that fit real school schedules and real student needs. This guide is a helpful reminder that the goal isn’t simply to fill in boxes on an IEP—it’s to build a plan that is reasonably calculated to help a student make appropriate progress, aligned with the Supreme Court’s Endrew F. decision.
Below is an easy-to-read tour of the guide’s key insights, organized around its four “checkpoints.” Think of these as four places where IEP teams can pause, ask better questions, and make stronger decisions about service minutes.
Why “service minutes” matter more than most people think
Service minutes are often treated like a scheduling task: “How many minutes can we fit in?” But the guidance emphasizes the opposite approach:
- Minutes should be driven by student need, not bell schedules, staffing convenience, or default time blocks.
- Special education is a service, not a place—minutes can often be delivered within general education settings through push-in, collaboration, and inclusive practices.
- Minutes should connect to goals and progress monitoring so the team can explain why the time is needed and whether it’s working.
When minutes are determined thoughtfully, teams are better positioned to deliver FAPE in the Least Restrictive Environment (LRE) and help students access grade-level standards, curriculum, and meaningful participation with peers.
Checkpoint 1: Serving ALL students (inclusion isn’t “extra”)
The guide starts with a clear message: students with disabilities should be educated in the general education setting to the maximum extent possible. That means IEP teams should begin with inclusion as the default and only move toward more restrictive settings when justified by objective, current data.
One of the most powerful themes from focus groups was that placement can become a “lane” students get stuck in. When that happens, students may have fewer opportunities to rejoin general education settings, even when they’re ready—or could be ready with the right supports.
What schools can do (practical inclusion moves)
- Change the culture and language: avoid defining services by “rooms” or program labels; emphasize that supports travel with the student.
- Build staff capacity using inclusionary practices like Universal Design for Learning (UDL) and evidence-based instruction.
- Create real collaboration time so general educators, special educators, and related service providers can co-plan and co-teach.
- Document minutes in a way that supports inclusion: minutes can be delivered in general education settings; more minutes does not automatically mean more restriction.
Where TinyEYE can help: online therapy can support inclusive service delivery by reducing travel time, increasing scheduling flexibility, and enabling services to be integrated into classroom routines when appropriate (for example, collaborating with teachers on carryover strategies, or supporting students during authentic academic tasks).
Checkpoint 2: Student-centered decisions (not schedule-centered decisions)
This checkpoint tackles a common problem: IEP minutes being determined by the school’s master schedule instead of the student’s needs. For example, if math is a 60-minute block, a student might automatically be pulled for the whole block—whether they need that intensity or not.
The guide also highlights “default increments” (like 30 minutes, 5 times per week) that can become routine without a clear rationale. When that happens, it’s harder to explain the decision, harder to implement with fidelity, and harder to adjust when the student’s needs change.
Better questions for IEP teams to ask
- What does the student need to make progress on their goals—and how do we know?
- Can services be delivered within general education instruction through push-in or co-teaching?
- Would a plan like frontloading then fading (or the reverse) better match the student’s learning trajectory?
- Are we choosing minutes because it’s easiest to schedule, or because it’s best for the student?
The guide also calls out limitations of online IEP platforms that may not reflect modern, collaborative service delivery models (like multiple providers, co-teaching, and concurrent services). The takeaway: even if the platform is clunky, the team’s thinking still needs to be individualized and defensible.
Checkpoint 3: Data-informed decisions and progress monitoring (make minutes make sense)
If Checkpoint 2 is about making student-centered decisions, Checkpoint 3 is about proving those decisions are working.
The guide emphasizes that data should inform:
- PLAAFP statements (Present Levels of Academic Achievement and Functional Performance)
- Measurable annual goals
- The amount and type of services (including minutes)
- Whether services should be adjusted through iterative IEP updates—not just once a year
What “better data” looks like in everyday school life
- Shared responsibility: general educators collect relevant curriculum data; special educators and related service providers collect goal-related data.
- Consistent routines: data doesn’t have to be fancy, but it should be timely and usable.
- Progress monitoring plans: teams decide how often data is collected (weekly, twice monthly, etc.) based on the goal area.
- Service delivery monitoring: families repeatedly raised concerns about whether minutes were actually happening—schools need simple, transparent ways to track delivery.
Where TinyEYE can help: online therapy services can support consistent documentation, predictable scheduling, and clearer tracking of service delivery. When schools can show what was delivered and how the student responded, teams can make better decisions at the next meeting—and families gain trust in the process.
Checkpoint 4: Preparing future educators (and connecting training to real practice)
The guide’s final checkpoint looks upstream: how do we prepare educators and leaders to do this work well?
Participants noted a disconnect between what educators learn in preparation programs and what they encounter in schools—especially around IEP development, data literacy, and progress monitoring. There’s also a call for general and special education preparation to be less siloed, so inclusion becomes “how school works,” not a separate initiative.
What this means for districts right now
- Support new educators with mentoring focused on inclusive IEP development.
- Provide professional learning that connects inclusion, SDI, and progress monitoring.
- Partner with preparation programs so candidates get authentic practice (including exposure to IEP systems and team processes).
Putting it into action: a simple “Every Minute Counts” checklist
If your team wants a quick way to apply the guidance, start here:
- Start with inclusion: how can services be delivered in general education settings first?
- Use current data: what does progress monitoring show about what the student needs now?
- Write measurable goals: goals should be trackable in real school routines, not just in isolated sessions.
- Choose minutes with a rationale: avoid default increments unless you can explain why they fit the student.
- Plan for collaboration: who will do what, where, and how will staff coordinate?
- Track delivery and progress: if minutes aren’t consistently delivered, outcomes suffer and trust erodes.
- Iterate: if the data says it’s not working, adjust—don’t wait for the annual review.
Ultimately, the most important message is hopeful: when teams center students, presume competence, collaborate across roles, and use data to guide decisions, service minutes become more than a compliance requirement—they become a pathway to meaningful progress.
For more information, please follow this link.
