��ݮ��Ƶ

Students who are seeking support services or accommodations at Embry‑Riddle Aeronautical University on the basis of a diagnosed specific learning disorder are required to submit documentation to verify eligibility under Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 and Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA).

The following guidelines are provided in the interest of ensuring that evaluation reports are appropriate and sufficient to document disability. The Student Accessibility Services Director is available to consult with evaluators concerning any of these guidelines.

A qualified professional must conduct the evaluation.

Evaluators conducting assessments and rendering a determination of a Specific Learning Disorder (with associated symptoms such as those commonly known as dyslexia, dysgraphia and/or dyscalculia) must have training in diagnostic testing and evaluation. The name, title, professional credentials, as well as certification information should be clearly stated in the evaluation. The following professionals are generally considered to be qualified to evaluate and determine the nature of a specific learning disorder: clinical psychologists, school psychologists, and other relevantly trained clinicians. Use of diagnostic terminology by someone whose training and experience are not in these fields is not acceptable. Any hand-written notes or documents that do not include the evaluator’s signature and professional letterhead will not be accepted.

Documentation should be current.

The provision of services and accommodations is based on the current impact of the disability on academic performance. In most cases, documentation should be completed within the past three years. If documentation is inadequate in scope or content, or does not address an individual’s current level of functioning and need for accommodation, reevaluation may be warranted. In cases where a new medication has been prescribed or medication previously taken has been discontinued subsequent to the evaluation, it may be necessary to update the evaluation report.

Documentation should be comprehensive.

Because a specific learning disability is, according to the DSM-5, characterized by “persistent difficulties learning keystone academic skills, with onset during the years of formal schooling,” multiple domains should be evaluated. “Key academic skills include reading of single words accurately and fluently, reading comprehension, written expression and spelling, arithmetic calculation, and mathematical reasoning.” Therefore, minimally, domains to be addressed must include but are not limited to:

• Aptitude: The Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale-Revised (WAIS-R) subtest scaled scores is the preferred instrument. The Woodcock-Johnson Psycho-Educational Battery-Revised: Tests of Cognitive Ability, or the Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scale: Fourth Edition, are acceptable.

• Achievement: Current levels of functioning in the areas of reading, mathematics and written language are required. Acceptable instruments include the Woodcock Johnson Psycho-Educational Battery - Revised; Tests of Achievement; Stanford Test of Academic Skills (TASK); Scholastic Abilities Test for Adults; or specific achievement tests, such as the Test of Written Language (TOWL), the Woodcock Reading Mastery Test-Revised or the Stanford Diagnostic Mathematics Test. The Wide Range Achievement Test-Revised is not a comprehensive measure of achievement and is therefore not suitable.

• Information Processing: Specific areas of information processing (e.g., short and long-term memory; sequential memory; auditory and visual perception/processing and processing speed) must be assessed. Use of subtest scaled scores from the WAIS-R or the Woodcock-Johnson Tests of Cognitive Ability is acceptable.

Alternative explanations should be ruled out.

The evaluator must investigate and determine that the specific learning disorder is not attributable to other causes, such as hearing and vision disorders or neurological or motor disorders.

Testing should be relevant.

Neurodevelopmental assessment is important in determining the current impact of the disorder in the academic setting. The evaluator should objectively review relevant testing to support the determination. If grade equivalents are reported, they must be accompanied by standard scores and/or percentiles. Test scores or subtest scales should not be used as the sole measure for diagnostic profile. Checklists and/or surveys can serve to supplement the evaluation but are not adequate in and of themselves for the determination of a specific learning disorder and do not substitute for observations and sound judgment. Data must logically reflect a substantial limitation for learning for which the individual is requesting accommodations.

A complete evaluation report should be provided.

According to the DSM-5, “Specific Learning Disorder is a neurodevelopmental disorder with a biological origin that is the basis for abnormalities at a cognitive level that are associated with the behavioral signs of the disorder.” An evaluation report should include a review and discussion of the DSM-5 criteria for the specific learning disorder both currently and retrospectively and specify which symptoms are present.

Documentation must include a specific determination.

The report must include a clear determination of the specific learning disorder based on the DSM-5 diagnostic criteria. Use of terms such as “suggests," “is indicative of” and/or “unique learning style” are not acceptable. Individuals who report only problems with poor spelling or not being good at math or writing do not fit the prescribed diagnostic criteria for a specific learning disorder. A positive response to medication or the use of medication does not in and of itself support or negate the need for accommodations.

An interpretive summary should be provided.

An interpretive summary based on a comprehensive evaluative process is a necessary component of the documentation. This summary should include indication and discussion of the substantial limitation to learning presented by the specific learning disorder and the degree to which this affects the individual in a learning environment.

Each recommended accommodation should include a rationale.

The evaluation report should include specific recommendations for accommodations that are realistic and that the university can reasonably provide. A detailed explanation should be provided as to why each accommodation is recommended and should be correlated with specific functional limitations determined through interview, observation and/or testing. A school plan such as an IEP is insufficient documentation in and of itself but can be included as part of a more comprehensive evaluative report. A prior history of accommodations without clear demonstration of current needs does not warrant the provision of like accommodations. The determination of reasonable accommodations for a disabled student at Embry‑Riddle rests with the Student Accessibility Services Director working in collaboration with the individual with the disability.

Students who are seeking support services or accommodations at Embry‑Riddle Aeronautical University on the basis of a diagnosed attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder (AD/HD) are required to submit documentation to verify eligibility under Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 and Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA).

The following guidelines are provided in the interest of ensuring that evaluation reports are appropriate and sufficient to document disability. The Student Accessibility Services Director is available to consult with clinicians concerning any of these guidelines.

A qualified professional must conduct the evaluation.

Clinicians conducting assessments and rendering a diagnosis of AD/HD must have training in differential diagnosis and the full range of neurodevelopmental disorders. The name, title, professional credentials, as well as licensing and certification information should be clearly stated in the evaluation. The following professionals are generally considered to be qualified to evaluate and diagnose AD/HD: clinical psychologists, neuropsychologists, psychiatrists, and other relevantly trained medical doctors. Use of diagnostic terminology by someone whose training and experience are not in these fields is not acceptable. Any hand-written notes or documents that do not include the clinician’s signature and professional letterhead will not be accepted.

Documentation should be current.

The provision of services and accommodations is based on the current impact of the disability on academic performance. In most cases, documentation should be completed within the past three years. If documentation is inadequate in scope or content, or does not address an individual’s current level of functioning and need for accommodation, reevaluation may be warranted. In cases where a new medication has been prescribed or medication previously taken has been discontinued subsequent to the evaluation, it may be necessary to update the evaluation report.

Documentation should be comprehensive.

Because AD/HD is, by definition, first exhibited in childhood (although it may not have been formally diagnosed) and manifests itself in more than one setting, relevant historical information is essential. In addition to providing detailed evidence of a childhood history of the impairment, the following areas must be investigated:

• A history of the individual’s presenting attentional symptoms should be provided, including evidence of ongoing impulsive/hyperactive or inattentive behaviors that significantly impair functioning in two or more settings.

• The individual’s developmental history.

• Family history that explores the presence of AD/HD and other educational, learning, physical or psychological difficulties deemed relevant by the examiner.

• Relevant medical history, including medications and determination of the absence of a medical basis for the symptoms being evaluated.

• A thorough academic history of elementary, secondary and postsecondary education, including review of prior psychoeducational reports to determine whether a pattern of strengths and weaknesses is supportive of attention-based learning problems.

• Description of current functional limitations pertaining to an educational setting that are presumably a direct result of problems with attention.

Alternative diagnoses and explanations should be ruled out.

The clinician must investigate and discuss the possibility of alternative or coexisting mood, behavioral, neurological and/or personality disorders which may confound the diagnosis of AD/HD. This process should include exploration of psychosocial and educational factors affecting the individual which may result in behaviors which mimic an AD/HD.

Testing should be relevant.

Neuropsychological or psychoeducational assessment is important in determining the current impact of the disorder in the academic setting. The clinician should objectively review relevant testing to support the diagnosis. If grade equivalents are reported, they must be accompanied by standard scores and/or percentiles. Test scores or subtest scales should not be used as the sole measure for diagnostic profile. Checklists and/or surveys can serve to supplement the diagnostic profile but are not adequate in and of themselves for the diagnosis of AD/HD and do not substitute for clinical observations and sound diagnostic judgment. Data must logically reflect a substantial limitation for learning for which the individual is requesting accommodations.

A complete diagnostic report should be provided.

According to the DSM-5, “the essential feature of AD/HD is a persistent pattern of inattention and/or hyperactivity-impulsivity that is more frequent and severe than is typically observed at a comparable level of development.” A diagnostic report should include a review and discussion of the DSM-5 criteria for AD/HD both currently and retrospectively and specify which symptoms are present.

Documentation must include a specific diagnosis.

The report must include a specific diagnosis of AD/HD based on the DSM-5 diagnostic criteria. Use of terms such as “suggests,” “is indicative of” and “attention problems” is not acceptable. Individuals who report only problems with organization, test anxiety, memory and concentration in selective situations do not fit the prescribed diagnostic criteria for AD/HD. A positive response to a new medication or the use of medication does not in and of itself support or negate the need for accommodations.

An interpretive summary should be provided.

An interpretive summary based on a comprehensive evaluative process is a necessary component of the documentation. This summary should include indication and discussion of the substantial limitation to learning presented by the AD/HD and the degree to which this affects the individual in a learning environment.

Each recommended accommodation should include a rationale.

The diagnostic report should include specific recommendations for accommodations that are realistic and that the university can reasonably provide. A detailed explanation should be provided as to why each accommodation is recommended and should be correlated with specific functional limitations determined through interview, observation and/or testing. A school plan such as an IEP/504 is insufficient documentation in and of itself but can be included as part of a more comprehensive evaluative report. A prior history of accommodations without clear demonstration of current needs does not warrant the provision of like accommodations. The determination of reasonable accommodations for a disabled student at Embry‑Riddle rests with the Student Accessibility Services Director working in collaboration with the individual with the disability.

Students who are seeking support services or accommodations at Embry‑Riddle Aeronautical University on the basis of a diagnosed autism spectrum disorder (ASD) are required to submit documentation to verify eligibility under Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 and Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA).

The following guidelines are provided in the interest of ensuring that evaluation reports are appropriate and sufficient to document disability. The Student Accessibility Services Director is available to consult with clinicians concerning any of these guidelines.

A qualified professional must conduct the evaluation.

Clinicians conducting assessments and rendering a diagnosis of ASD must have training in differential diagnosis and the full range of neurodevelopmental disorders. The name, title, professional credentials, as well as licensing and certification information should be clearly stated in the evaluation. The following professionals are generally considered to be qualified to evaluate and diagnose ASD: clinical psychologists, neuropsychologists, psychiatrists and other relevantly trained medical doctors. Use of diagnostic terminology by someone whose training and experience are not in these fields is not acceptable. Any hand-written notes or documents that do not include the clinician’s signature and professional letterhead will not be accepted.

Documentation should be current.

The provision of services and accommodations is based on the current impact of the disability on academic performance. In most cases, documentation should be completed within the past three years. If documentation is inadequate in scope or content, or does not address an individual’s current level of functioning and need for accommodation, reevaluation may be warranted. In cases where a new medication has been prescribed or medication previously taken has been discontinued subsequent to the evaluation, it may be necessary to update the evaluation report.

Documentation should be comprehensive.

Because ASD is, by definition, first exhibited in childhood (although it may not have been formally diagnosed) and manifests itself in more than one setting, relevant historical information is essential. In addition to providing detailed evidence of a childhood history of the impairment, the following areas must be investigated:

• A history of the individual’s presenting autistic symptoms with any specifiers should be provided, including evidence of ongoing behaviors that significantly impair functioning in two or more settings.
• The individual’s developmental history.
• Family history that explores the presence of ASD and other educational, learning, physical or psychological difficulties deemed relevant by the examiner.
• Relevant medical history, including medications and determination of the absence of a medical basis for the symptoms being evaluated.
• A thorough academic history of elementary, secondary and postsecondary education, including review of prior psychoeducational reports to determine whether a pattern of strengths and weaknesses is supportive of ASD-based learning and/or social deficits.
• Description of current functional limitations pertaining to an educational setting that are presumably a direct result of problems related to ASD.

Alternative diagnoses or explanations should be ruled out.

The clinician must investigate and discuss the possibility of alternative or coexisting mood, behavioral, neurological and/or personality disorders which may confound the diagnosis of ASD. This process should include exploration of psychosocial and educational factors affecting the individual which may result in behaviors which mimic an ASD.

Testing should be relevant.

Neuropsychological or psychoeducational assessment is important in determining the current impact of the disorder in the academic setting. The clinician should objectively review relevant testing to support the diagnosis. If grade equivalents are reported, they must be accompanied by standard scores and/or percentiles. Test scores or subtest scales should not be used as the sole measure for diagnostic profile. Checklists and/or surveys can serve to supplement the diagnostic profile but are not adequate in and of themselves for the diagnosis of ASD and do not substitute for clinical observations and sound diagnostic judgment. Data must logically reflect a substantial limitation for learning for which the individual is requesting accommodations.

A complete diagnostic report should be provided.

According to the DSM-5, “Autism spectrum disorder is characterized by persistent deficits in social communication and social interaction across multiple contexts, including deficits in social reciprocity, nonverbal communicative behaviors used for social interaction, and skills in developing, maintaining, and understanding relationships. In addition to the social communication deficits, the diagnosis of [ASD] requires the presence of restricted, repetitive patterns of behaviors, interests or activities. Because symptoms change with development and may be masked by compensatory mechanisms, the diagnostic criteria may be met based on historical information, although the current presentation must cause significant impairment.” Therefore, a diagnostic report should include a review and discussion of the DSM-5 criteria for ASD, both currently and retrospectively and describe which symptoms and specifiers are present.

Documentation must include a specific diagnosis.

The report must include a specific diagnosis of ASD based on the DSM-5 diagnostic criteria. Use of terms such as “suggests,” “is indicative of,” “social problems” and “spectrum issues” is not acceptable. Individuals who report only problems with social engagement in selective situations do not fit the prescribed diagnostic criteria for ASD. A positive response to medication or the use of medication does not in and of itself support or negate the need for accommodations.

An interpretive summary should be provided.

An interpretive summary based on a comprehensive evaluative process is a necessary component of the documentation. This summary should include indication and discussion of the substantial limitation to learning presented by the ASD and the degree to which this affects the individual in a learning environment.

Each recommended accommodation should include a rationale.

The diagnostic report should include specific recommendations for accommodations that are realistic and that the university can reasonably provide. A detailed explanation should be provided as to why each accommodation is recommended and should be correlated with specific functional limitations determined through interview, observation and/or testing. A school plan such as an IEP/504 is insufficient documentation in and of itself but can be included as part of a more comprehensive evaluative report. A prior history of accommodations without clear demonstration of current needs does not warrant the provision of like accommodations. The determination of reasonable accommodations for a disabled student at Embry‑Riddle rests with the Student Accessibility Services Director working in collaboration with the individual with the disability.

Students who are seeking support services or accommodations at Embry‑Riddle Aeronautical University on the basis of a diagnosed psychiatric disability are required to submit documentation to verify eligibility under Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 and Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA).

The following guidelines are provided in the interest of ensuring that evaluation reports are appropriate and sufficient to document disability. The Student Accessibility Services Director is available to consult with clinicians concerning any of these guidelines.

The evaluation must be provided by a qualified professional.

Professionals conducting evaluations and providing a diagnosis of a psychiatric disability must have training and competency in assessing the full range of psychiatric disorders. The name, title, professional credentials as well as licensing and certification information should be clearly stated in the evaluation. The following professionals are generally considered to be qualified to evaluate and diagnose psychiatric disorders: clinical psychologists (PsyD), licensed clinical social workers (LCSW), psychiatrists (MD) and other relevantly trained clinicians.

Documentation should be current.

Documentation must be current, reflecting evaluation completed within the past year.

Documentation should be comprehensive.

The evaluation should be based on a comprehensive clinical interview and psychological testing where clinically indicated. The evaluation should include a developmental, social and family history; a relevant medical history; and a complete mental status examination. Current prescription medications should be noted, and a description of any side effects that would compromise academic functioning should be included.

Documentation must include a specific diagnosis.

The evaluation report must include a specific diagnosis of a psychiatric disorder based on the DSM-5 diagnostic criteria with an accompanying description of the specific symptoms that the individual presents.

Documentation should reflect the impact on academic functioning.

An interpretive summary based on the comprehensive evaluative process is a necessary component of the documentation. This summary should include indication and discussion of the substantial limitation to learning presented by the psychiatric disorder and the degree to which this affects the individual in a learning environment.

Specific recommendations for academic accommodations should be included.

The diagnostic report should include specific recommendations for accommodations that are realistic and that the university can reasonably provide. A detailed explanation should be provided as to why each accommodation is recommended and should be correlated with specific functional limitations and the specific diagnosis indicated.

A prior history of psychiatric disorder without clear demonstration of current need does not warrant eligibility for ADA services or accommodations. The determination of reasonable accommodations for a student with a disability at Embry‑Riddle rests with the Student Accessibility Services Director working in collaboration with the student.

All disability documentation will remain confidential.

These guidelines have been developed with the assistance of the Disabled Student Services in Higher Education listserv, 1999.

Students who are seeking support services or accommodations at Embry‑Riddle Aeronautical University on the basis of a diagnosed chronic health disability are required to submit documentation to verify eligibility under Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 and Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA).

The following guidelines are provided in the interest of ensuring that evaluation reports are appropriate and sufficient to document disability. The Student Accessibility Services Director is available to consult with clinicians concerning any of these guidelines.

The evaluation must be provided by a qualified professional.

The physician (M.D. or D.O.) must have qualifications that are recognized by the State of Arizona as affirming his or her eligibility to render a medical diagnosis. The name, title, professional credentials as well as licensing and certification information should be clearly stated in the evaluation. Documentation from other qualified and licensed healthcare professionals will be considered on a case-by-case basis.

Documentation should be current.

Documentation must be current, reflecting evaluation provided within the past year.

Documentation should be comprehensive.

The evaluation should describe the type and severity of the individual’s symptoms at the time of first diagnosis and should state the approximate date of onset. It should also describe the subsequent course of the disabling condition and specify the current treatment of the condition, detailing any currently prescribed or recommended medication, therapies, care or assistive devices.

Documentation should reflect the functional impact of the disability.

The evaluation should contain a description of the type and severity of the current symptoms and note the impact of the disability in all relevant spheres of functioning. The evaluation should address how the disability may affect the individual’s ability to function in the academic setting (e.g., reading, comprehension, memory, writing, note-taking, test-taking, endurance and attention). The evaluation should indicate any activities that are typically a part of an academic program that would be specifically contraindicated by the individual’s disability or disabilities.

Specific recommendations for academic accommodations should be included.

The evaluation should include specific recommendations for accommodations that are realistic and that the University can reasonably provide. Accommodations are adjustments to the academic environment provided to ensure equal access to an enrolled student based on his or her substantial impairment of functional capacity. They are not remedial in nature, nor can they fundamentally alter the nature of, or reduce the academic standards of, a course or degree program. A detailed explanation should be provided as to why each accommodation is recommended and each recommendation should be correlated with the specific functional limitations related to the disability or disabilities.

A prior history of a chronic health disability without clear demonstration of current need or substantial impairment does not warrant eligibility for ADA services or accommodations. The determination of eligibility and reasonable accommodations for an Embry‑Riddle student with a disability rests with the Student Accessibility Services Director working in collaboration with the student.

All disability documentation will remain confidential.

Four-Part SAS Approval Process for a Request to Have an Emotional Support Animal (ESA) Live With a Student on Campus

Note: Student Accessibility Services (SAS) must receive all documents listed below before reviewing the request. If approved by SAS, the student must also meet with Housing and Residential Life (HRL) staff to review and sign the HRL agreement.

Part 1 of 4: Submit documentation from a healthcare provider verifying the need

A disability accommodation request for an emotional support animal in residential housing must include supporting information from the requesting student's physician, physician's assistant, psychologist, nurse practitioner or licensed social worker. The clinician must provide the following information on professional letterhead, and it must be typed, signed and dated. Verification of the student's disability and a statement that includes:

• The length of time the health professional has been working with the student.
• Whether the animal was specifically prescribed as treatment for the student.
• How the animal serves as an accommodation for the verified disability, including the symptoms that will be mitigated by the presence of the animal, and any evidence that the animal has benefited the student.
• How the need for the animal relates to the ability of the student to use and enjoy the university's residential housing.
• The species and breed of the animal.
• Whether the stress of caring for the animal in a university residential environment will exacerbate the effects of the student's disability.
• The importance to the student's well-being that the animal be in residence on campus.
• Any consequences related to the disability that may result if the accommodation is not approved.

Part 2 of 4: Submit documentation verifying the health of the animal

A disability accommodation request for an emotional support animal in residential housing must include supporting information from a veterinarian familiar with the animal. The veterinarian must provide the following information on professional letterhead, and it must be typed, signed and dated.

• The letter must include the animal’s name, species, sex, and breed; along with a physical description of the animal.
• The veterinarian must state that the animal has had a complete physical exam. Additionally, the date of the exam must occur no earlier than 30 days prior to the start of the semester during which the animal will begin living with the student in residential housing on the Embry‑Riddle Prescott campus.
• The veterinarian must verify that the animal is healthy and that he or she is not currently treating the animal for any diseases or injuries. In the case of a cat or dog, the veterinarian must verify that the animal has been spayed or neutered.
• The veterinarian must also verify that the animal is up to date on all vaccinations required by the State of Arizona, which includes rabies and DHPP for dogs and rabies for cats, and state the future dates of any required booster shots.

Additionally, the student is responsible for obtaining a yearly physical exam of the animal and submitting to SAS verification of the exam, and that the animal continues to remain in good health and is up to date on any required booster shots.

Part 3 of 4: Submit a photo of the animal

The student should submit a recent photo of the animal to SAS, in addition to the above required documentation from a healthcare provider and the animal’s veterinarian. If the photo does not include a complete or clear image of the animal, SAS staff may ask the student to submit a new photo.

Part 4 of 4: Review the duration of approval

The student must also obtain approval for the ESA from Housing and Residential Life (HRL) staff before the ESA may begin living with the student in residential housing. HRL staff may override SAS approval if the student fails at any time to meet or abide by HRL requirements. Once HRL staff permit the ESA to move into residential housing, SAS approval will only continue until the student moves to off-campus housing. If the student does move to off-campus housing and later returns to residential housing, they will have to submit a new request that follows all of the above guidelines.

Students may contact Student Accessibility Services (SAS) when seeking support services and/or temporary accommodations on the basis of a diagnosed illness or injury that is anticipated to be resolved within a limited period of time. Students may also contact SAS to seek a recommendation for an incomplete if required by a professor and it is being requested for the above reason. Please note that while SAS can recommend to a professor that a grade of incomplete would be appropriate, the professor has sole authority to grant the request.

Students will be asked to submit documentation that supports their request for temporary accommodations. The director of SAS will review the documentation and use it as the basis for any decisions about how to respond to the request. Examples of conditions that qualify for temporary accommodations include but are not limited to post-op recovery time following major surgery, concussion or traumatic brain injury (TBI), limited mobility due to broken bones or muscle injuries, or an illness or other injury of limited duration with symptoms affecting academic performance. The following guidelines are provided in the interest of ensuring that evaluation reports are appropriate and sufficient to document a temporary disability or need for a grade of incomplete. The Student Accessibility Services director is available to consult with clinicians concerning any of these guidelines.

A qualified professional must conduct the evaluation.

Clinicians conducting assessments and rendering a diagnosis of an illness or injury that is expected to be resolved after a specific period of time must have training in differential diagnosis. The name, title, professional credentials, as well as licensing and certification information should be clearly stated in the evaluation. The following professionals are generally considered to be qualified to evaluate and diagnose a condition: medical doctors, clinical psychologists, neuropsychologists, psychiatrists, and other relevantly trained medical doctors and nurse practitioners. Use of diagnostic terminology by someone whose training and experience are not in these fields is not acceptable. Any hand-written notes or documents that do not include the clinician’s signature and professional letterhead will not be accepted.

Documentation should be current.

The provision of services and accommodations is based on the current impact of the temporary disability on academic performance. In most cases, documentation should focus on the impact of the injury or illness based on an evaluation performed at the time signs or symptoms first developed. However, if the impact is not immediately known but arises after a period of time has passed since development of the injury or illness, the fact that delayed symptoms could surface should be addressed in the documentation. Additionally, documentation must be dated within three months prior to the start of the semester for which temporary accommodations are being requested. If documentation is older than three months, new documentation may be required. Documentation should also clearly show the time period for which the temporary accommodations are needed. These accommodations or the leave may be extended for one additional semester if further supporting documentation from a clinician is submitted. After that time, any extension of accommodations is at the discretion of the director of SAS. More comprehensive documentation may be requested.

If documentation is inadequate in scope or content, or does not address an individual’s current level of functioning and need for accommodations, reevaluation may be warranted. In cases where a new medication has been prescribed or medication previously taken has been discontinued subsequent to the evaluation, it may be necessary to update the evaluation report.

Documentation should be comprehensive.

The impact of an injury or illness may vary between individuals. Therefore, documentation must cover all aspects of how this individual’s daily activities have been affected and the barriers to learning that have been created for the individual by the illness or injury. The documentation should include a discussion of how the individual’s academic performance could be affected and the anticipated duration of that effect.

A change in status or diagnosis may need additional documentation.

If at any point the clinician determines that the illness or injury is likely to become permanent, new documentation may be requested to continue or change any current accommodations. This documentation will be needed to show the long-term effect on the individual’s activities of daily living, including academic performance.

Documentation must include a specific diagnosis.

The report must include a clear diagnosis and explanation of the illness or injury. Also include a list of any applicable medications, their role in treatment, and the expected duration of their course if known. A positive response to medication or the use of medication does not in and of itself support or negate the need for accommodations.

An interpretive summary should be provided.

An interpretive summary based on a comprehensive evaluative process is a necessary component of the documentation. This summary should include indication and discussion of the substantial limitation to learning presented by the temporary disability and the degree and duration (if known) to which this will affect the individual in a learning environment.

Each recommended accommodation should include a rationale.

The diagnostic report should include specific recommendations for accommodations that are realistic and that the university can reasonably provide. A detailed explanation should be provided as to why each accommodation is recommended and should be correlated with specific functional limitations determined through interview, observation and/or testing. A prior history of accommodations without clear demonstration of current needs does not warrant the provision of like accommodations. The determination of reasonable accommodations for a disabled student at Embry‑Riddle rests with the Student Accessibility Services director working in collaboration with the individual with the disability.