Procedural Safeguards: Student and Parent Rights in Special Education

A Brief Overview:

  • Procedural safeguards are a legal requirement for schools and must be provided to parents once a year and during specific situations (e.g., initial referral, filing a complaint, change in placement due to disciplinary action).
  • The Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction (OSPI) issued a statewide procedural safeguards notice, available for download in multiple languages, that outlines parental rights in special education.
  • The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) requires that each state education agency provide ways to solve disagreements between parents and schools regarding a student’s special education.  Procedural safeguards provide information on the formal and informal dispute resolution options available in Washington state.
  • Specific protections are in place when disciplining students with disabilities, including requirements for conducting manifestation determinations and continuing education services during extended removals.
  • Section 504 includes its own procedural safeguards to protect the rights of students with disabilities who are not eligible for special education under IDEA. The Section 504 Notice of Parent Rights is available for download in multiple languages from OSPI.

Full Article

The Procedural Safeguards are a written set of legal protections under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) designed to ensure that students with special needs receive appropriate education. IDEA, implemented under Washington State law, requires schools to provide the parents/guardians of a student who is eligible for or referred for special education with a notice containing a full explanation of the rights available to them (WAC 392-172A-05015). Understanding these safeguards allows for effective advocacy in a child’s education and ensures their rights are protected throughout the special education process. They do not constitute legal representation or legal advice.

A copy of the procedural safeguards notice is downloadable in multiple languages from the Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction (OSPI). School districts must provide this notice once a year and during key times such as:

In addition to detailing when the procedural safeguards notice must be provided, the procedural safeguards contain information about several key areas, including:

Prior Written Notice

Schools must give prior written notice (PWN) before making any significant decisions about a student’s education, such as changes in identification, evaluation, or placement. This notice must include a detailed explanation of the decision and the reasons behind it. This document is shared after a decision is made and prior to changes in a student’s educational program.

Parental Consent

Schools must get written parental consent (permission) before conducting an initial evaluation or providing special education services for the first time. Parents can withdraw their consent at any time, but this doesn’t undo actions already taken. Once consent is given, the school has 35 school days to complete the evaluation. This consent is only for the evaluation, not for starting services. If the child is a ward of the state, consent might not be needed under certain conditions. When starting special education services under the initial IEP, the school must get consent again, and if refused, they can’t force it through mediation or legal action. Consent is also needed for reevaluations involving new tests, and schools must document their attempts to get it. However, consent isn’t needed to review existing data or give standard tests that all students take.

Independent Educational Evaluation

If a parent disagrees with the school’s evaluation of their child, they can ask for an independent educational evaluation (IEE) that the school district will pay for. The district must give the parent information on where to get an IEE and the rules it must follow. If the district does not agree to the IEE, they have 15 calendar days to either start a file a due process hearing request or agree to pay for the IEE. PAVE provides a downloadable sample Letter to Request an Independent Educational Evaluation.

Confidentiality of Information

Student educational records are confidential. IDEA provides parents and guardians the right to inspect and review their student’s educational records and request amendments if they believe they are inaccurate or misleading. When the child turns 18 years of age, these rights pass from the parent or guardian to the student. The Department of Education provides a website page called Protecting Student Privacy to share resources and technical assistance on topics related to the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA). The procedural safeguards explain terms about educational records from IDEA and FERPA to help parents understand their rights and protections.

Dispute Resolution

IDEA requires that each state education agency provide ways to solve disagreements between parents and schools regarding a student’s Individualized Education Program (IEP). In Washington State, there are both informal and formal options. When parents and school districts are unable to work through disagreements, the procedural safeguards outline the dispute resolution processes available. These options ensure that parents and schools can work towards a mutually agreeable solution while protecting the child’s right to a Free Appropriate Public Education (FAPE).  The formal dispute resolution options available through OSPI are mediation, due process hearings, and state complaints.

Disciplinary Protections

When disciplining students eligible for special education, schools must follow specific rules to ensure fair treatment. If a student is removed for more than 10 consecutive school days or shows a pattern of removals totaling over 10 days in a school year, it’s considered a change of placement, and parents must be notified. After 10 days, the school must provide services to help the student continue their education. A manifestation determination must be conducted within 10 days to see if the behavior was related to the student’s disability. If it was, the IEP team must address the behavior and return the student to their original placement unless agreed otherwise. If not, the student can be disciplined like other students but must still receive educational services.

Also, schools must keep providing educational services to students with disabilities even if they are removed from their current school setting for disciplinary reasons. This helps the student keep making progress in their education. Parents and guardians have the right to join meetings about their child’s disciplinary actions and can ask for a due process hearing if they disagree with decisions. These safeguards ensure students with disabilities receive necessary support and fair treatment during disciplinary actions.

In special cases, such as carrying a weapon or using drugs at school, the student can be placed in an alternative setting for up to 45 days regardless of whether the behavior was related to the student’s disability.

Protections for Students Not Yet Eligible for Special Education

The procedural safeguards outline protections for students who have not yet been found eligible for special education but for whom the school should have known needed services. A school is considered to have this knowledge if a parent previously expressed concerns in writing, requested an evaluation, or if staff raised concerns about the student’s behavior to supervisory personnel. However, if the parent refused an evaluation or the child was evaluated and found ineligible, the school is not considered to have knowledge. In these cases, the student may be disciplined like other students, but if an evaluation is requested during this period, it must be expedited. If the student is found eligible, special education services must be provided.

Requirements for Placement in Private Schools

If parents believe the public school cannot provide FAPE and choose to place their child in a private school, there are steps to request reimbursement from the district. If the child previously received special education services, a court or administrative law judge (ALJ) may require the district to reimburse the cost of private school enrollment if it is determined that the district did not timely provide FAPE and that the private placement is appropriate, even if it does not meet state educational standards.

Reimbursement may be reduced or denied if the parent did not inform the IEP team of their rejection of the proposed placement during the most recent IEP meeting, failed to provide written notice to the district at least 10 business days before the removal, or did not make the child available for a district evaluation after prior written notice. However, reimbursement cannot be denied if the district prevented the notice or if the parent was unaware of their responsibility to provide it. The court or ALJ may also choose not to reduce reimbursement if the parents are not able to read or write in English, or if reducing or denying the reimbursement would cause serious emotional harm to the child.

This PAVE article, Navigating Special Education in Private School, explains the rights of students to receive equitable services in private schools, regardless of whether they are placed there by their parents or through an Individualized Education Program (IEP) decision.

Procedural Safeguards under Section 504

The procedural safeguards under Section 504 ensure that parents are informed of their rights before any evaluation or development of a 504 plan begins. These safeguards include the right to request a referral for evaluation, the formation of a 504 team to assess the student’s needs, and the requirement for parental consent before any evaluation or implementation of the plan. Parents must be provided with a copy of their rights at key points in the process. Additionally, the school must review and evaluate the 504 plan annually and re-evaluate the student’s eligibility at least every three years. Parents also have the right to file formal complaints if they believe the school is not following the 504 plan or if their child is experiencing discrimination or harassment. The Section 504 Notice of Parent Rights is available for download in multiple languages from OSPI.

Conclusion

Procedural safeguards are a requirement under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) that ensure the rights of students with disabilities and their parents are protected throughout the special education process. By outlining the legal protections available, these safeguards empower parents to actively participate in their child’s educational planning and decision-making. Understanding these rights—from prior written notice and parental consent to confidentiality and dispute resolution—allows families to advocate effectively and collaborate with schools. Through adherence to these safeguards, schools and parents can work together to provide a Free Appropriate Public Education (FAPE) tailored to the unique needs of each child.

Additional Resources:

  • OSPI’s Special Education webpage includes information about data collection, dispute resolution, funding information, guidance for families, legal procedures, program improvement initiatives, resource libraries, and support for secondary transition services.
  • Special Education Parent & Community Liaison provides non-legal support by phone (360-725-6075) or through an online message portal, Ask OSPI web page.
  • PAVE provides direct support to parents and guardians, youth with disabilities, adult self-advocates, and professionals. Complete the Get Help request form to be connected with individualized information, resources, and training.

When Parents and Schools Disagree: Navigating Special Education Disputes

A Brief Overview:

  • If parents win a due process hearing or civil lawsuit, the school district might have to pay their attorneys’ fees. Conversely, if the complaint is deemed frivolous, parents might have to pay the school district’s fees.
  • Protections are in place for children not yet identified as needing special education if disciplinary actions are taken.
  • Every school district has a process for filing complaints related to harassment, intimidation, and bullying (HIB).
  • Complaints about discrimination involving students with disabilities can be filed with OSPI or the U.S. Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights (OCR). OCR will not handle cases already being addressed by another agency or school process unless the process is completed and the complaint is filed within 60 days.

Full Article

The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) requires that each state education agency provide ways to solve disagreements between parents and schools regarding a student’s Individualized Education Program (IEP). These options ensure that parents and schools can work towards a mutually agreeable solution while protecting the child’s right to a Free Appropriate Public Education (FAPE). The Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction (OSPI) offers both informal and formal dispute resolution processes.

These dispute resolution options provide structured processes for addressing and resolving disagreements, ensuring that the rights of students with special needs are upheld and that they receive the education and services to which they are entitled.

Informal Dispute Resolution

IEP facilitation is a voluntary and informal process where parents and school districts can address their special education concerns with the assistance of a trained, neutral facilitator. This process allows both parties to resolve issues collaboratively without the formality of mediation, and it is provided at no cost. OSPI contracts with Sound Options Group to offer free facilitation services from facilitators skilled in conflict resolution to help clarify disputes, set agendas, and work towards mutually agreeable solutions. Participation in facilitation is entirely optional for both families and districts.

The IEP facilitation process starts when either a family or a school district contacts the Sound Options Group to request help. A parent can request facilitation by contacting Sound Options Group directly by phone at 800-692-2540 or 206-842-2298 (Seattle) to request a mediation session. For Washington State relay service, dial 800-833-6388 (TDD) or 800-833-6384 (voice). Sound Options Group gathers initial information about the student and the needs of both parties, confirming that both the family and district agree to proceed with a facilitated IEP meeting. Once the IEP team sets a date for the 3–4-hour meeting, the facilitator is assigned. The facilitator helps everyone prepare by sharing documents, setting a mutually agreeable agenda, confirming the meeting details, and preparing both parties for the meeting. After the facilitated IEP meeting, a case worker from Sound Options Group and the facilitator review the session and decide if another meeting is needed. A successful facilitated IEP meeting will result in the development of an IEP that is tailored to meet the unique needs of the student.

Another option for informal dispute resolution is Washington State Governor’s Office of the Education Ombuds (OEO), which helps parents and schools resolve disagreements about special education services. Acting as a neutral and independent guide, the OEO helps parents and educators understand special education regulations, facilitates problem-solving, and advises on communication strategies to support a team approach to a student’s education. The OEO does not provide legal advice, act as an attorney, conduct investigations, or advocate for any party. OEO can be contacted through their online intake form or by phone (1-866-297-2597) with language interpretation available.

Formal Dispute Resolution

When informal methods are unsuccessful, families and schools can turn to formal dispute resolution processes outlined in the procedural safeguards  and available through the special education system. A copy of the procedural safeguards notice for Washington is downloadable in multiple languages from the Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction (OSPI).

In Washington state, the formal dispute resolution options are:

1. Mediation

Mediation is a voluntary process provided at no cost to parents and schools. It is designed to resolve disputes related to the identification, evaluation, educational placement, and provision of FAPE. Both parties must agree to participate in mediation. Mediators are trained, impartial individuals knowledgeable about special education laws. OSPI contracts with Sound Options Group to provide trained, neutral mediators to facilitate effective communication and problem-solving between parents and school districts. This brochure, Mediation in Special Education, outlines the services provided by Sound Options Group. Discussions during mediation are confidential and cannot be used in due process hearings or civil proceedings. If an agreement is reached, it must be documented in writing and is legally binding. Parents can contact Sound Options Group directly to request mediation.

2. Special Education Complaint

Any individual or organization can file a special education complaint if they believe a school district or public agency has violated Part B of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). Complaints must be filed within one year of the alleged violation. OSPI investigates the complaint, gathering information from both the parent or guardian and the school district. OSPI then issues a written decision addressing the complaint and any corrective actions required within 60 days of receiving the complaint. PAVE has developed this training video, Procedural Safeguards: How to File a Special Education Complaint, that walks through OSPI’s community complaint form with a pretend scenario.

3. Due Process Hearing

A due process hearing is a formal meeting to resolve disputes about a child’s identification, evaluation, placement, or FAPE. Either parents or the school district can request this hearing, but they must do so within two years of the issue, unless there was misrepresentation or withheld information. The request for a due process hearing must be in writing, signed, and include:

  • the name, address, and contact information of the student (even if homeless)
  • the name of the student’s school
  • the school district responsible for the IEP
  • a description of the issue, the facts, and related events
  • your proposed resolution

The original request must be provided to the other party – the parent or guardian must send it to the superintendent of the student’s school district, and the school district must provide the original to the parent or the guardian of the student. In addition, a copy of the request must be sent to the Office of Administrative Hearings by mail (PO Box 42489, Olympia, WA 98504-2489), fax (206-587-5135), or email (oah.ospi@oah.wa.gov). The party asking for a due process hearing must have proof that they gave their request to the other party.

Before the hearing, the school district must meet with the parents and relevant IEP team members within 15 days to try to resolve the issue at a resolution session. OSPI provides a direct to download form, Information and Forms on Resolution Sessions. During the hearing, both sides present evidence and witnesses. Parents have the right to bring a lawyer, present evidence, and question witnesses. An administrative law judge (ALJ) makes a decision, which can be appealed in state or federal court. The decision is final unless it is appealed and the decision is overturned. If an agreement is reached before the hearing, it must be written down in a settlement agreement.

For disputes about disciplinary actions that change a student’s placement, expedited due process hearings are available. These hearings happen faster than regular ones to resolve urgent issues quickly.

Dispute Resolution Outside of Special Education

If parents disagree with the decision made in a due process hearing, they have the right to file a civil lawsuit in state or federal court. This must be done within a specific time period, often 90 days, after the due process hearing decision. The court will review the administrative record, hear additional evidence if necessary, and make a ruling (decision) in the case. The civil lawsuit is not a part of the special education dispute resolution process and there are additional costs associated. Please note that PAVE is not a legal services agency and cannot provide legal advice or representation. Washington State Office of Administrative Hearings has compiled this Legal Assistance List for Special Education Due Process Disputes.

If parents win a due process hearing or lawsuit, the school district might have to pay their attorneys’ fees. But if the court decides the complaint was frivolous or filed for the wrong reasons, parents might have to pay the school district’s attorneys’ fees.

Additional Considerations

If a child hasn’t been identified as needing special education but parents think they should be, there are protections if the child faces disciplinary actions. If the school knew the child might need special education services before the behavior happened, they must follow special education disciplinary procedures.

Every school district has a process for filing a formal complaint related to harassment, intimidation and bullying (HIB). PAVE has compiled information and resources to address bullying in this article, Bullying at School: Resources and the Rights of Students with Special Needs.

Complaint Processes Related to Discrimination

OSPI’s Complaints and Concerns About Discrimination page states, “Each student must have equal access to public education without discrimination.” This page contains Discrimination Dispute Resolution Information Sheets that contain definitions of key terms, information about the role of district Civil Rights Compliance Coordinators, and instructions and requirements for filing different types of complaints, available for download in different languages. Anyone can file a complaint about discrimination involving students with disabilities in a Washington public school, which is prohibited by Washington law (RCW 28A.642.010). Formal discrimination complaints must be written, and the complaint must contain:

  • a description of the incident
  • why it is allegedly discriminatory
  • proposed corrective action the district or charter school can take

The formal discrimination complaint must be hand carried, mailed, faxed, or emailed to district superintendent, administrator of the charter school, or Civil Rights Coordinator. When a school district or charter school receives a complaint, it must investigate and respond within 30 days, unless an extension is agreed upon. The civil rights coordinator provides the complaint procedure and ensures a thorough investigation. If exceptional circumstances require more time, the school must notify the complainant in writing. The school can also resolve the complaint immediately if both parties agree. After the investigation, the school must respond in writing, summarizing the results, stating whether they complied with civil rights law, explaining appeal options, and detailing any corrective measures, which must be implemented within 30 days unless otherwise agreed.

Students with disabilities in public schools are also protected against discrimination by federal laws, including Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 and IDEA. The U.S. Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights (OCR) accept complaints with overlapping civil rights concerns, such as racism and disability discrimination. An OCR complaint must be filed within 180 calendar days of the alleged discrimination. If the school district’s dispute resolution process is already handling the case through a means like what OCR would provide, OCR will not take on the case. Once the school district’s process is completed, individuals have 60 days to file their complaint with OCR, which will then decide whether to accept the result from the other process. OCR provides step-by-step instructions for filing a discrimination complaint.

Some families are anxious about questioning actions taken by the school. Parents have protections under the law. The Office for Civil Rights maintains specific guidelines that prohibit retaliation against people who assert their rights through a complaint process. 

Additional Resources:


Special Education Blueprint: The Six Principles of IDEA 

Navigating the education system can be challenging for students with special needs and their families. Fortunately, the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) provides a robust framework to ensure that eligible students receive the support they need. IDEA is a federal law built on six key principles that guarantee specific rights and protections. 

The six principles of IDEA are: 

1. Free Appropriate Public Education (FAPE) 

Students with disabilities have the right to a free and appropriate education (FAPE) tailored to their needs. This means they get special education services, accommodations, and modifications at no cost to their families. To better understand what FAPE entails, let’s break down its key components: 

  • Free: Education for children with disabilities is provided at no cost to parents, except for incidental fees like club memberships, which are the same as for general education students. 
  • Appropriate: Each child with a disability is entitled to an education tailored to their individual needs, including suitably challenging goals and supporting progress in the general education curriculum. Depending on the unique needs of the student, appropriate services may include transition services that continue through the school year in which the student turns 21 years of age. 
  • Public: Children with disabilities have the same right to attend public schools as their non-disabled peers. Public schools must accommodate their individual needs and help them plan for the future. 
  • Education: All children in the state between the ages of 5 and 18 are entitled to a public education. Eligible children with disabilities will receive a public education that includes special education and related services, preparing them for further education, employment, and independent living. 

2. Appropriate Evaluation 

IDEA requires schools to take a closer look at children with potential disabilities (Child Find Mandate). Before a student can receive special education services, an appropriate evaluation must be conducted. This comprehensive assessment is designed to identify the child’s specific educational needs. The evaluation must be free of bias, use multiple methods of assessment, and be conducted by a team of qualified professionals. Parents and guardians have the right to be involved in this process. The results provide information that the school and parents use to make decisions about how the child’s education can be improved. 

The school follows specific deadlines for an evaluation process. They have 25 school days to respond to the referral in writing. If they proceed with the evaluation, they have 35 school days to complete the assessment. 

3. Individualized Education Program (IEP) 

The IEP is a critical component of IDEA. The IEP is developed collaboratively by a team that includes the student, parent(s) or guardian(s), teachers, school administrators, and other specialists. The program is reviewed at least once a year. Every student on an IEP gets some extra help from teachers, but the rest of the program depends on what a student needs to learn. Areas of need may be academic, social and emotional skills, and/or general life skills.  

Washington State requires schools to start IEP services within 30 calendar days of the eligibility finding. That means school staff generally start drafting the IEP right after the school and family meet to talk about the evaluation and the student’s eligibility. A family member can ask to extend the 30-day deadline, but schools cannot delay the process without parental consent. 

4. Least Restrictive Environment (LRE) 

IDEA emphasizes that children should be educated alongside their non-disabled peers “to the maximum extent appropriate.” This principle ensures that children with disabilities have access to the same educational opportunities as their peers. General education classrooms and school spaces are the least restrictive. If the school has provided extra help in the classroom but the special education student still struggles to access FAPE, then the IEP team considers other options. The school explains placement and LRE in writing on the IEP document.  

5. Parent and Student Participation 

The IDEA and state regulations about IEP team membership make it clear that parents or legal guardians are equal partners with school staff in making decisions about their student’s education. This includes participation in IEP meetings, access to educational records, and the ability to provide input on educational goals and services. As a child matures, they are also encouraged to participate in the decision-making process, promoting self-advocacy and independence.  When the student turns 18, educational decision-making is given to the student. The school does its best to bring parents and students into the meetings, and there are specific rules about how the school provides written records and meeting notices (WAC 392-172A-03100). 

6. Procedural Safeguards 

Procedural safeguards are designed to protect parent and student rights by ensuring that they receive a written explanation of their rights at the time of referral for special educational evaluation and every year after. When parents and schools disagree, these rights describe the actions a parent can take informally or formally. 

A copy of the procedural safeguards is downloadable in multiple languages from the Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction (OSPI), the guidance agency for Washington schools. Parents may receive procedural safeguards from the school any time they request them. They also may receive a copy if they file a complaint with the state. Procedural safeguards are offered when a school removes a student for more than 10 days in a school year through exclusionary discipline.  

Learn more about IDEA 

IDEA ensures that individuals with disabilities receive support and education throughout their lives, from early childhood through adulthood.  It drives how states design their own special education policies and procedures. In Washington State, rules for the provision of special education are in Chapter 392-172A of the Washington Administrative Code (WAC). 

PAVE provides training on a variety of topics, including IDEA. Trainings are live and on-demand, in person and online. Register for an upcoming training on the PAVE calendar

Additional Information: 

Steps to Read, Develop, and Understand an IEP Worksheet

The IEP document is a lot to absorb. You will be better prepared to support your child when you review the IEP draft before meeting with the IEP team for the first time. A child’s education is worth taking time to read for understanding.

  1. Identify Your Child’s Eligibility Category
    • Take note of the eligibility category that entitles the student to an IEP. The eligibility category is listed on the “Cover Page” of the IEP document, near the name, birth date, and other personal details about the student. This category is decided during the evaluation review meeting.
      • My child’s eligibility category is:
  2. Read the IEP Draft Before the IEP Meeting
    • Be sure to ask for a copy of the IEP draft with enough time to look it over before the meeting.
      • I requested the copy of the IEP draft on:
    • Remember, the school’s first version is a DRAFT IEP, and family members of the IEP team have the right to participate in program development.
    • The amount of time a family needs for review also might depend on whether the document is translated into a a language besides English. Under state and federal law, parents have the right to information about their child’s education in a language they can understand.
      • Yes, I require that the IEP be translated to: (insert language)
        • I requested the translation of the IEP on (insert date)
      • No, I do not require that the IEP be translated to another language
  3. Review the Service Matrix
    • Located halfway through the IEP, the Service Matrix looks like a chart or grid. These are the suggested services and they are how a student receives Specially Designed Instruction (SDI) in each area where the student has significant deficits that make them eligible for special education.
    • How many minutes are being offered to support the student in each area of specially designed instruction? (The SDI supports at least one goal for each subject area.)
      • For example: you will see three columns with the following
SubjectService Minutes

What Related/Ancillary Services is your child eligible to receive? These are therapeutic services, such as occupational, physical, or speech therapy. Mental health counseling and parent training may be listed as Related Services.

ServiceFrequency Minutes

Sometimes Related Services are offered through “consultation,” meaning that a specialist will make recommendations to school staff but won’t work directly with the student. Are any of your child’s services being provided through consultation?

ServiceFrequency Minutes

4. Review the Present Level Statement

The Present Levels of Academic Achievement and Functional Performance (PLOP for short) are with in the first few pages of the IEP. This Section of the IEP explains why the student needs services.

Does the information in the present level statement reflect your student’s current abilities and needs?

  • Yes
  • No
  • What, if anything should be added?

5. Review the proposed goals:

Are the goals Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant, and Time-Bound (SMART)?

  • Yes
  • No
  • *Highlight goals that are not written as SMART goals to discuss during the IEP meeting.

Are any of the goals too easy for your child?

  • Yes
  • No
  • *Highlight goals that are too easy to discuss with
    the IEP team.

6. Review the Least Restrictive Environment (LRE) Statement: Read and review information about where your child will spend their day. *Note any concerns or feedback to discuss with the team.

7. Review the Accommodations and Modifications: Read and review information about accommodations and modifications. *Note anything that may need to be added and any questions you have about how they will be provided in the educational setting.

Learn more about Steps to Read, Develop, and Understand an Initial IEP

This article also forms part of the 3-5 Transition Toolkit

Parent Participation in Special Education Process is a Priority Under Federal Law

A Brief Overview

  • Schools are required to accommodate parents to ensure their attendance and participation at meetings where their child’s special education services are discussed. Those rights are affirmed in a court decision from 2013: Doug C. Versus Hawaii.
  • A meeting that includes family is a higher priority than a renewal deadline.
  • If a deadline is missed, a student’s IEP services continue uninterrupted while meeting schedules are arranged to include family participation. The student’s eligibility does not expire.
  • The Washington Administrative Code (WAC) describes the participation rights of parents (WAC 392-172A-05001).
  • Failure to accommodate parent access to meetings when a child’s eligibility or services are discussed is a denial of the student’s right to a Free Appropriate Public Education (FAPE).

Full Article

Parents have the right to participate in all meetings where a student’s special education services are discussed. Those rights are protected by federal and state laws.

Students have a right to attend meetings about their school services at any age. Schools must invite students once their Individualized Education Program (IEP) includes a Transition Plan—a legal requirement by the school year when a student turns 16. The student is not required to attend but must be invited and accommodated to participate if they choose to.

A court decision in 2013 includes statements that family rights are more important than other legal requirements, such as renewal deadlines. More information about that case, Doug C. Versus Hawaii, is included later in this article.

Accessibility is a right

When inviting families to participate in meetings, the school is required to accommodate their needs related to scheduling, language access, parent or student disability, or something else. If a parent is ill, for example, the school is responsible to wait until the parent is well enough to meet. The school is responsible to provide a meeting format to meet the family’s needs, including through in person, virtual, or telephone attendance with any interpretation services needed for full participation.

IEP eligibility and services do not lapse or expire because the school delayed a meeting to accommodate the family. If a deadline is missed, a student’s services continue uninterrupted while meeting schedules are arranged to include family participation.

Here are examples of meetings where a parent/guardian must be invited and accommodated to participate:

  • Referral meeting to discuss whether to evaluate a student for eligibility
  • Evaluation review meeting
  • IEP meeting
  • Placement meeting
  • Transition conference to discuss moving into a new school or level of school (preschool into kindergarten, for example)
  • Meeting to discuss a Functional Behavioral Assessment (FBA) or Behavior Intervention Plan (BIP)
  • Meetings related to discipline, truancy, or complaints about Harassment, Intimidation, and Bullying (HIB)
  • Any other meeting where school-based services are discussed

What does the state say about parent rights to participate?

The Washington Administrative Code (WAC) describes the participation rights of parents (WAC 392-172A-05001).

The WAC explains that schools are not required to invite parents for “informal or unscheduled conversations involving school district personnel and conversations on issues such as teaching methodology, lesson plans, or coordination of service provision. A meeting also does not include preparatory activities that school district personnel engage in to develop a proposal or response to a parent proposal that will be discussed at a later meeting.”

The WAC includes information about a parent’s right to visit school: “A parent of a student eligible for special education services may request permission to observe their student’s current educational placement, and to observe any educational placement proposed or under consideration either by a parent or a group that makes decisions on the educational placement of the parent’s child, in accordance with applicable school district policy and state law.”

Here is a key statement from the WAC related to parent participation:

“The parents of a student eligible for special education services must be afforded an opportunity to participate in meetings with respect to the identification, evaluation, educational placement and the provision of FAPE to the student.”

What is FAPE?

The statement above includes the word FAPE. FAPE stands for Free Appropriate Public Education. FAPE is what a student with a disability is entitled to receive. The school district is responsible to deliver FAPE.

The district must ensure that students with disabilities receive accessible, equitable, and appropriate services: All are elements of FAPE. PAVE provides a video training with more information about these key features of student rights: Student Rights, IEP, Section 504, and More.

An IEP provides FAPE through specially designed instruction and goal setting, progress monitoring, supplementary aids and services, accommodations, a thoughtfully chosen placement, and more. The IEP team meets to discuss all of this and make sure FAPE is being provided. Parents are equal partners for discussing all aspects of a student’s education.

TIP: Ask for a draft copy of the IEP or any other documents that will be discussed with enough time to review them before a meeting. The draft IEP is unfinished until it’s been reviewed and finalized in a team meeting that includes family participation.

Families have always been a priority under the law

The collaborative process of an IEP team that includes the family has been part of special education since federal laws were written to protect a student’s right to receive an education designed just for them. Parent participation is one of six primary principles of the federal Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA).

Here’s more language that describes FAPE: The IEP must be “reasonably calculated to enable a child to make progress appropriate in light of the child’s circumstances.”

This phrase—progress appropriate in light of the child’s circumstances—comes from another court decision, referred to as Endrew F. That Supreme Court decision established that meaningful progress must be tracked and monitored, and that the IEP must be adjusted if meaningful progress isn’t being made.

The IEP meeting is where families participate in tracking and monitoring that progress. Parents contribute important information about the progress or unmet needs of their children. Their observations provide critical information for team decision-making, and the federal laws were written to acknowledge the value of those contributions. That’s why parent participation is required for FAPE

TIP: Here’s a way to talk about parent rights within the process of special education: Failure to accommodate parent access to meetings when a child’s eligibility or services are discussed is a denial of FAPE.

What if parents cannot attend a meeting by the required renewal deadline?

Legal protections for students and families require a timely process. Schools are responsible to host a meeting that includes the family to update a student’s IEP at least every year. The IEP lists an “annual renewal date” on its cover page.

The school is also responsible to re-evaluate the student at least every three years to determine ongoing eligibility and to ensure that information about the student’s strengths and needs is up-to-date and the student is appropriately served through the IEP.

Sometimes there is a conflict when an evaluation or IEP renewal date sneaks up on the team and meetings aren’t scheduled early enough to accommodate the family and meet the deadline. It’s also possible that a family emergency or illness could prevent their timely participation.

In those situations, federal law has made it clear that the family’s participation is more important than the re-evaluation or IEP renewal deadline. The school can document the reason that the deadline is delayed, and a student’s services can continue without interruption until the meeting happens with family participants.

A student’s IEP eligibility does not expire because an evaluation is delayed, and the IEP does not lapse. Families can share this article and information about the federal court ruling if there is confusion.

What did Doug C. Versus Hawaii say?

The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals handed down a decision on June 13, 2013, that reversed rulings by lower courts. The final ruling meant that the school in Hawaii was held accountable for having an IEP meeting without a parent. 

The court explained that schools must include parents at meetings unless they “affirmatively refused to attend.” Other legal language uses the phrase “good faith effort” to describe how schools must attempt to include families.

In the case of Doug C., the court found the school did not try hard enough to include the parent. In a hearing, the parent was able to share documentation showing he had provided the school with explanations each time he was unable to attend a meeting at the school’s suggested time and location. One documented explanation was that he was ill. In that case, the school held the meeting without him because they believed the IEP was about to “expire.”

The court said this rationale was based on a flawed premise. Earlier court rulings already had found that services do not end because an IEP renewal deadline is missed.  

In its decision, the court stated, “Parental participation is key to the operation of the IDEA for two reasons: Parents not only represent the best interests of their child in the IEP development process; they also provide information about the child critical to developing a comprehensive IEP and which only they are in a position to know.”

A place to get more information about court rulings related to special education is Wrightslaw.com. A Wrightslaw analysis of Doug C. Versus Hawaii includes a question-and-answer summary of the case. Here are highlights from that information:

Question: If a meeting is held after an annual renewal deadline, do IEP services lapse?

Answer: No. A child’s IEP does not lapse. Continuing to provide services based on the most recent IEP does not deny FAPE or “deprive a student of any educational benefit,” the court determined. The court further explained that there is no basis for assuming a school cannot provide services for a student whose annual IEP review is overdue.

Question: If there are scheduling conflicts, is priority given to school staff or the parent?

Answer: Priority is given to the parent. The court stated, “The attendance of [the]. . . parent, must take priority over other members’ attendance . . . an agency cannot exclude a parent from an IEP meeting in order to prioritize its representatives’ schedules.”

Question:  If the school has a meeting without the parent, can they make it okay by having another meeting within 30 days?

Answer:  No. The court found that parental involvement after-the-fact is not enough because “the IDEA contemplates parental involvement in the creation process.”

Question:  If a school district violates a procedural safeguard, such as parental involvement in meetings, does there need to be another finding of fault to show denial of FAPE? For example, would a court need to show that a child wasn’t receiving meaningful educational benefit from the services?

Answer:  No. The court does not need to determine a second violation. The denial of a parent’s right to participate in meetings is a violation of FAPE.

A parent’s right to participate in IEP process is part of the Procedural Safeguards that are written into the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). Schools are responsible for sharing a copy of the Procedural Safeguards at every formal meeting or whenever a parent requests them.

A copy of the Procedural Safeguards is downloadable from the website of the Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction (OSPI). An OSPI page titled Parent and Student Rights lists multiple translated versions of the Procedural Safeguards available for download.

Child Find: Schools Have a Legal Duty to Evaluate Children Impacted by Disability

A Brief Overview

  • School districts have an affirmative duty to locate, evaluate and potentially serve any infant, toddler or school-aged student impacted by disability under the Child Find Mandate — part of special education law.
  • The duty to evaluate is based on a known or suspected disability that may significantly impact access to learning. Data from evaluation then determines eligibility. Washington’s Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction (OSPI) has state specific information about Child Find.
  • PAVE recommends making referrals in writing and provides a sample letter.
  • Public school districts provide evaluations and special education services at no cost to the family.
  • Child Find is intact during the pandemic, as are all student rights and protections. For more information, PAVE provides a training video: Student Rights: Special Education During COVID-19 and Beyond.

Full Article

Family caregivers, teachers, or anyone else can refer a child for an educational evaluation if there is reason to suspect that a disability is impacting that child’s ability to learn. The local school district provides a comprehensive evaluation, free to the family, if there is a known or suspected disability and reason to believe that appropriate early learning or school success requires intervention.

The school district’s duty to seek out, evaluate and potentially serve infants, toddlers or school-aged students is guaranteed through the Individuals with Disabilities Act (IDEA), as part of the Child Find Mandate. The law says that this obligation to evaluate exists for all children ages 0-21, regardless of whether they:

  • Attend private or public school
  • Are housed in a stable way or are homeless
  • Live with a birth or adopted family or are a ward of the state

Receiving adequate marks and “passing from grade to grade” does not erase the school’s responsibility to evaluate. Impacts to all areas of school and learning are considered. Academic challenges might trigger an evaluation. So can school refusal, communication deficits, missing social skills, trouble with emotional regulation and behavior challenges.

Children in private and home-based schools are protected by Child Find

Parents have the right to request an evaluation from the public-school district regardless of whether a child attends public school. If the child is found eligible, the local district is responsible to provide services unless the family does not want them. In some cases, families arrange to have a child attend private or home-based school but receive special-education services through the public school. Private schools do not have to evaluate children or provide special education, but they are responsible to provide equitable services and to comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act. See PAVE’s article about navigating private school.

The IDEA includes categories of disability that might qualify a student for special education services at a public school. PAVE has an article about IDEA and additional articles with information about evaluation process.

Request an evaluation in writing

PAVE’s Parent Training and Information (PTI) staff recommend that families request evaluation formally—in writing. Specific deadlines apply in the evaluation process. Washington districts have 25 school days to decide whether to evaluate. After parents sign consent, staff have 35 school days to complete the evaluation.

sample letter to request evaluation is available on PAVE’s website. The Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction (OSPI) provides more detail about state requirements. A national agency called Wrightslaw has additional information about Child Find.

The Child Find Mandate requires states to implement programs to locate children who might need more support, particularly those who might need services as infants or toddlers. Child Find is written into the IDEA in “Part C,” which protects children 0-3 with known or suspected disabilities in need of early intervention. However, Child Find applies to all children who might need services—through age 21 or until high-school graduation.

Testing determines whether the child has a disability that is causing learning delays. For very young children, this includes a known or suspected disability that might delay learning. For a child younger than 3 in Washington State, early intervention is provided with an Individualized Family Service Plan (IFSP). PAVE’s website includes an article with more information about early intervention services and the transition to school-aged services at age 3.

For a child ages 3-21, an evaluation determines whether a disability is significantly impacting access to school and whether specially designed instruction is necessary for the student to access learning at school.

Schools use data to determine whether a child is eligible for services

The duty to evaluate is based on a known or suspected disability that may significantly impact access to learning. Data from evaluation then determines eligibility. Washington’s Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction (OSPI) has state specific information about Child Find.

The referral process includes a review of existing data about a student. Existing data might include information from families, medical providers and anyone who can discuss a child’s performance at public school, preschool, private school, at home or in another setting. Based on this data, the district decides whether to evaluate. Often the decision is discussed at a “referral meeting” with school staff and parents. If a school district refuses to evaluate, family caregivers can request an explanation in writing and have the right to dispute that decision by exercising Procedural Safeguards.

Child Find requires schools to do outreach

School districts operate Child Find programs in a variety of ways. For example, a school might:

  • Train teachers to recognize signs that a student might need to be screened
  • Publish, post and distribute information for parents so they can understand how to request evaluation and why a child might benefit from services
  • Offer workshops or other trainings to parents about evaluation, early intervention and special education

When should the caregiver for a young child be concerned?

If parents do not think their child is growing or developing like other children the same age, they can request an educational evaluation, even if a pediatrician says there is no cause for concern. The national Center for Parent Information and Resources (CPIR website: ParentCenterHub.org) provides a list of developmental milestones to help parents recognize potential delays.

Early intervention can be critical. Parents can contact their local school district or seek more information and assistance from Early Support for Infants and Toddlers (ESIT), managed by Washington’s Department of Children, Youth, and Families (DCYF).

To determine whether early intervention is needed, an evaluator considers:

  • Physical skills (reaching, crawling, walking, drawing, building)
  • Cognitive skills (thinking, learning, solving problems)
  • Communication skills (talking, listening, understanding others)
  • Self-help or adaptive skills (eating, dressing)
  • Social or emotional skills (playing, interacting with others)
  • Sensory processing skills (handling textures, tastes, sounds, smells)

The evaluator uses natural situations to look at these skills while a child stacks blocks, draws, counts, cuts with scissors, jumps, or performs other activities. Testing time varies, and parents can ask how much time was spent, which settings were reviewed, and who conducted the review.

Parents can decide whether they agree with the results and whether they believe the evaluation was appropriate. “Appropriate evaluation” is protected by special education law, the IDEA, as a primary principle. Parents who disagree with the results of an evaluation—or a school’s decision to not evaluate—have the right to dispute decisions through a variety of informal and formal processes, described in Procedural Safeguards.

Birth-3 services are provided through an IFSP

If an evaluation determines that a child requires early intervention, then those services are provided through an IFSP. Early intervention services might include speech and language therapy; physical therapy; psychological services; home visits; medical, nursing, or nutrition services; hearing or vision services.

In most cases, services are provided in the home or in a child-care setting. The goal is for services to take place in the child’s “natural environment.” Occasionally a child may visit a provider’s office for specialized services.

What does an older child’s evaluation look like?

Educational evaluations for children 3-21 are conducted in consultation with a team that includes parents, teachers, special education professionals and school district administrators and evaluation specialists who can interpret and explain the results.

The assessments can look like academic tests, questionnaires, or informal observations. There are no right or wrong answers, and the evaluators are looking for clues that might show an area of need for different or specialized instruction. A comprehensive evaluation can measure a child’s ability to:

  • Think, reason and problem-solve
  • Understand spoken language
  • Explain ideas and speak clearly
  • Understand facial expressions and body language
  • Use facial expressions and body language to express emotion
  • Remember what they hear and understand different sounds
  • See differences in pictures and designs, remember what they see, and understand those visual images
  • Use body parts with physical skill
  • Get along with other people
  • Read, write, spell, and do math
  • Hear and see

Parents can provide a health history and notes and diagnoses from medical providers that contribute outside information to be considered as part of the assessment.

The Down Syndrome Guild of Greater Kansas City provides a comprehensive list of commonly used assessments for a variety of disability conditions.

Help for children 3-5 years old

Children ages 3-5 with identified disabilities can receive free special education and related services at preschools run by the local public-school district or through federal Head Start or the state-run Early Childhood Education and Assistance Program (ECEAP). Often these preschools are specifically designed for children with disabilities, so inclusion with general education students may be limited.

Once a student enters the local public school for kindergarten, specialized instruction may be provided in general education by special educators who “push in” with support in the classroom. The IDEA requires education in the Least Restrictive Environment (LRE) to the greatest extent possible with typically developing peers. Special education is a service, not a place: See PAVE’s article with that slogan as its title.

Some children do not thrive in typical classrooms. The IEP team, including the parent, may determine that a smaller classroom or “pull out” instruction is needed for the student to make meaningful progress. These decisions are documented in the IEP.

Related services can support parent training

“Related services” might include speech-language therapy, occupational therapy, mental health counseling or special transportation to school or extracurricular activities. Training about positive behavior interventions for family caregivers, school staff and children also could be provided as a related service. Students who are enrolled in a private or home school may be dually enrolled in public school to access related services provided through an IEP.

During the pandemic, some extra attention has been paid to parent training as a related service in order for parents to understand how to support children learning from home.

What happens if a doctor or teacher refers a child for evaluation?

Any adult knowledgeable about a child’s condition can refer that child for evaluation. If a person outside the family makes the referral, parents get a formal written notification about the referral. Parents must sign consent for an evaluation process to begin.

Parents/guardians do not have to give permission. Parents who refuse to give permission have the right to request an evaluation later.

If school staff refer a student for an evaluation and parents do not want their child evaluated, the school district may ask parents to participate in mediation to further discuss the decision. If parents still refuse to sign consent, a school district can begin a legal procedure called Due Process to have the case considered by an administrative law judge. Through this process, a district may be allowed to screen a child for special education without parent consent.

If a student does not qualify for IEP services, a Section 504 Plan might help

A student who is evaluated and determined ineligible for special education might still qualify for some support with a Section 504 Plan. Section 504 defines disability much more broadly than the IDEA, and a student can qualify for support if an identified disability significantly impacts a major life activity, such as learning or socializing with peers.

Educational evaluations identify barriers to education, so schools can figure out how to help children make meaningful progress. Sometimes special education is provided to help with access to academic learning, and sometimes it is needed for a child to build functional skills or to develop more skill in Social Emotional Learning. When requesting a full and complete evaluation, parents can ask questions and provide feedback to make sure the school evaluates in all areas of suspected disability and that the tools for evaluation are comprehensive and varied.

Sometimes a child comes to the attention of the school because of unexpected behaviors that might lead to disciplinary actions. PAVE’s article, What Parents Need to Know when Behavior Impacts Discipline at School, has additional information for families who might be requesting an educational evaluation because of behavior incidents.

A Supreme Court Ruling Could Impact Your Child’s IEP

A Brief Overview

  • The parents of a child named Endrew F argued that their son with a disability deserved more from his public school. They appealed their case all the way to the Supreme Court, and the ruling in their favor could mean more robust rights for all children with Individualized Education Programs (IEPs).
  • The implications of this unanimous decision are reverberating through schools and agencies that oversee special education. Read on to learn how you can participate in important conversations about these uplifted standards.
  • Learn key phrases from this ruling to help you be a proactive member of your child’s IEP team. The U.S. Department of Education has an important guidance document that includes some of this language: For example, a school must offer an IEP “to enable a child to make progress appropriate in light of the child’s circumstances.” The court additionally emphasized the requirement that “every child should have the chance to meet challenging objectives.”
  • This article and the included resource links can help you understand the Endrew F ruling and how you might use this information in advocating for your child’s rights.

Full Article

Endrew F (Drew) is a student with autism, ADHD and challenging behaviors. His disabilities impact his academic and functional skills, including his ability to effectively communicate about his emotions and needs. He attended a public elementary school in Douglas County, Colorado, and qualified for special education with an Individualized Education Program (IEP). His parents moved him to a private school in fourth grade, arguing that:

  1. Drew did not make measurable progress on the goals set in his past IEPs, and
  2. The IEP did not address Drew’s escalating behavior problems.

Drew had more success at the private school, and his parents filed a Due Process complaint with the Colorado Department of Education in 2012. They requested reimbursement for the private school tuition on the basis that the public school had failed to provide access to a Free Appropriate Public Education (FAPE), which is a cornerstone of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), the federal law that governs special education.

The parents argued, and lost, at the state, district and circuit court levels. These lower courts ruled that because Drew had made at least some progress toward his IEP goals, then the school had met its obligation to provide FAPE. Wrightslaw is one source for more detail about the case and its history.

The family filed an appeal with the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS), and on March 22, 2017, the court ruled in their favor. The ruling, which took effect immediately, ended a discrepancy in circuit courts across the country by determining that a trivial amount of progress (“merely more than de minimis”) is insufficient to satisfy a student’s right to FAPE. In order to meet its “substantive obligation under the IDEA,” the court stated, “a school must offer an IEP that is reasonably calculated to enable a child to make progress appropriate in light of the child’s circumstances.”

Since then, a variety of agencies have been analyzing the court’s unanimous ruling and creating guidance documents to help schools and families understand the implications of this case. On April 9, 2018, The Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP) provided a two-hour webinar with speakers from various education fields to discuss the ruling and its broad-sweeping impact on schools and families. Parents need to understand this case, the experts agree, because family voices are critical to raising the level of expectation.

High expectations are a theme in discussions about the ruling. Some other emerging themes:

  • Parents/guardians are the first and most important lifelong teachers of their children. They, therefore, need to be fully welcomed and heard as key collaborators in the process.
  • IEP teams need to assure relevance when writing appropriately ambitious IEP goals for lifelong learning and success in varied environments. Goals toward narrowly defined academic “mastery” often miss this opportunity to create flexible learners.
  • State academic standards should be noted at the IEP table, but challenging objectives are to be individualized, not “one size fits all” or based in goals generated by computer data programs.
  • Educational benefit is determined on an individual basis, and standards for measurement must be varied and rigorous to ensure meaningful progress.
  • An IEP with the same goals year-after-year does not meet the standard of FAPE.

The Statewide Parent Advocacy Network (SPAN) issued a summary of the Endrew F ruling that includes a list of “Roles and Responsibilities” for professionals and families. “This new standard will require a prospective judgment by school officials that will be informed not only by the expertise of school officials, but also by the input of the child’s parents and guardians,” SPAN stated in this overview document.

Understood, a consortium of non-profit agencies committed to providing information on attention and learning problems in children ages 3-21, developed a free, downloadable Endrew F Advocacy Toolkit that provides a four-page handout of Talking Points and a four-page IEP Worksheet to assist parents in using principles from the Endrew F ruling in their own advocacy. For example, the court’s ruling included the words “appropriately ambitious” as a requirement for IEP goals. The worksheet offers a place where a parent can record a list of areas that they feel a child’s goals might not be ambitious enough. The worksheet then suggests a script for a parent to use at an IEP meeting:

“I know that my child’s goals should be appropriately ambitious. Even if my child is behind in academics, the IEP goals should aim to help my child catch up. When can we look at present level of performance and put services and supports in place, so we can set goals that allow my child to meet the same standards as his peers?”

The National Center for Parent Leadership, Advocacy, and Community Empowerment (National PLACE) offered a Webinar to explain how the ruling provides families with a new advocacy tool. PLACE, a membership organization whose website is named “Parents at the Table,” has made available some resource documents, including a Power Point with a set of slides titled: “What Parents Can Do.” For example, PLACE suggests that parents prepare questions for an IEP meeting using key phrases pulled directly from the Supreme Court’s ruling. Here are some sample questions:

  • Has the team carefully considered my child’s potential for growth?
  • Have we considered whether my child is on track to achieve or exceed grade-level proficiency?
  • Are the goals appropriately ambitious, with sufficiently challenging objectives?
  • How is the IEP reasonably calculated to enable my child to make progress appropriate in light of his circumstances?

PLACE emphasizes that parents should not accept an IEP with the same goals and objectives from year to year, indicators that a child has failed to make meaningful progress. And, using language directly from the SCOTUS ruling, PLACE encourages parents to hold schools accountable for a child’s progress by requesting a “cogent and responsive explanation” for decisions about goals and progress measurements.

Diana Autin, an attorney and executive director of National PLACE, uses the webinar platform to review foundational principles of the IDEA, re-authorized by Congress in 2004, to set a stage for understanding new guidelines related to the SCOTUS ruling. “It’s important to note that Endrew F can’t be understood or defined or used without it being within the context of the IEP requirements of IDEA,” she says.

Autin shares the PLACE webinar platform with Michael Yudin, former assistant secretary at the U.S. Department of Education and a longtime national leader in disability rights. Yudin points to key language in the ruling that clarifies earlier Department of Education guidance documents that he helped develop. The heart of IDEA, he says, is specially designed instruction that helps students reach goals that are “ambitious but achievable” and in alignment with grade-level content standards. “Specially designed instruction is adapting as appropriate to the needs of the child,” Yudin says, “so that the content, methodology and the delivery of instruction are appropriate to ensure access to the general curriculum so that the child can meet the educational standards that apply to all children.”

Inclusion sometimes requires access to specially designed instruction in Social-Emotional Learning (SEL), and the Endrew F decision reinforces the IDEA’s requirement for necessary behavioral interventions and supports, Yudin says. “This guidance clearly states that failure to consider and provide those needed behavioral supports and interventions through the IEP is in fact likely to result in a denial of FAPE.”

The child at the heart of this landmark case, Drew, struggled with phobias and had behaviors that included screaming, climbing over furniture and occasionally running from school. According to the PLACE webinar: “His parents believed that his progress had stalled and that the strategies used to address his behaviors were insufficient to allow him to learn.” Behavior interventions at the private school chosen by Drew’s parents helped, and his access to learning improved. In considering all aspects of the case, including a lack of suitable behavior interventions, the Supreme Court ruled that the public school had denied Drew access to FAPE.

A child “must be afforded the opportunity for significant learning,” the court stated. And individualized supports and programming must provide for more than “de minimis,” or trivial, progress to meet the standard of FAPE. “For children with disabilities, receiving instruction that aims so low would be tantamount to sitting idly,” the court wrote, “…awaiting the time when they were old enough to drop out.”

The ruling in Endrew F has brought new emphasis to existing policy related to discipline and behavior. On August 1, 2016, the U.S. Department of Education issued a Dear Colleague guidance document to establish clarity about the IDEA’s requirements for behavioral assessments and interventions. “Recent data on short-term disciplinary removals from the current placement strongly suggest that many children with disabilities may not be receiving appropriate behavioral interventions and supports, and other strategies, in their IEPs,” the document states. “In light of research about the detrimental impacts of disciplinary removals… the Department is issuing this guidance to clarify that schools, charter schools, and educational programs in juvenile correctional facilities must provide appropriate behavioral supports to children with disabilities who require such supports in order to receive FAPE and placement in the least restrictive environment (LRE).”

The Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP) offered a summary of policy that included this statement: “Parents may want to request an IEP Team meeting following disciplinary removal or changes in the child’s behavior that impede the child’s learning or that of others, as these likely indicate that the IEP may not be properly addressing the child’s behavioral needs or is not being properly implemented.”

For further information about the Endrew F decision and its implications, refer to the following resources:

The Center for Parent Information and Resources/Parent Center Hub

National PLACE/Parents at the Table

Wrightslaw

Understood Endrew F Advocacy Toolkit

SCOTUSblog

SPAN Parent Advocacy Network

OSEP IDEAs that Work