Access to Aid Episode 3: Benefits Available through the IDEA

Children with diagnosed disabilities have access to additional services through your local education agency (LEA)! The legislation providing these additional services and protections is called the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). IDEA passed in 2004 based on Education for All Handicapped Children Act, which passed in 1975. The IDEA requires public schools provide specialized services to all children from birth to age 21. It also requires schools to:

• Develop an IEP for each student with an eligible disability 

• Document agreed upon by teachers, parents, specialists, and (if possible) the student 

• Present achievement level for the student 

• Goals for the school year 

• Special support needed to achieve those goals 

IDEA has over 250 regulations, but there are 6 principles which serve as the foundation for which IDEA and all of the regulations are based:

• Free Appropriate Public Education 

  • Meaningful educational benefit at no cost to families

  • Appropriate Evaluations

  • Administered in the language or mode of communication of the child 

  • Timely manner 

• Individualized Education Program (IEP)

  • To determine appropriate placement of child in each area (special or general)

    • Includes:

      • Student’s present levels of academic performance 

      • Annual goals and benchmarking objectives 

      • Services and supplementary aids to be received 

      • Detailed explanation of instances where a student is not participating in the general classroom and why 

      • IEP progress, transition, etc. 

• Least Restrictive Environment (LRE)

  • Placement/setting of services and service delivery are provided in the LRE and is dependent on the child’s individual needs 

  • Explanation must be provided for anything not in the general education setting

  • A continuum of settings must be available and provided in accordance with the child’s individuals needs 

• Parent Participation 

  • Parents, and when appropriate, the child will be invited to take part in all education decision-making meetings 

  • Parents may agree/refuse to have testing conducted and/or to stop or continue to receive special education services in part or whole 

• Due Process 

  • If a disagreement exists, parents have the right to request mediation and may appeal due process decisions with state or federal courts 
    

What is an IEP?

• What needs to be included in the IEP?

  • Present - Where are they now?

    • Present level of performance (PLOP)

    • Strengths and weaknesses 

    • Assistive technology 

    • Test scores, assessment from evaluation 

    • Where are they from where they should be for the grade level 

  • Future - Goals for the year 

    • Where do they need to grow

  • Measurable Annual Goals 

  • Where should child make goals?

  • How will school help reach those goals?

  • Instruction Setting 

  • General ed, combined special and general education setting, or contained classroom 

  • Testing accommodations 

  • Where they will be given the test 

  • Support and services given during the test 

  • Law requires annual updates

• Signed by all members on the team (including parents and students - usually middle and high school)

• IEP Team Process

  • One assigned team coordinator 

  • Another member assigned to take notes and ensure all paperwork is completed appropriately 

  • Usually begins with a draft, and then parents, students, and teachers are encouraged to contribute their thoughts to tailor the IEP 

  • Students are usually present for part of the meeting and then parents address concerns to better work on making more specific goals and how to achieve those goals 

  • Assistive technology can be integrated into the method for attaining goals 

  • Go through the entire school day, including non-academic times 

  • Balancing LRE with needed support to reach the goals 

  • Explanation for any periods of time that the student will not be educated with non-disabled peers 

  • Determine how progress towards meeting IEP goals will be reported to parents 

The IDEA requires public schools to provide specialized services to all children from birth to age 21 and was created to provide educational opportunities beyond the bare minimum “in response to Congress’s perception that a majority of handicapped children in the United States were either totally excluded from schools or sitting idly in classrooms awaiting the time when they were old enough to drop out” and ensure all children have access to a Free Appropriate Public Education (FAPE).

Clarifying what was required of school districts to satisfy FAPE, Rowley v. Hendrick Hudson School District significantly limited the rights of students with disabilities to reach their fullest potential. The Court in Rowley clarified that a school was only required to provide accommodations to the point where the child was progressing normally at grade level, as grade level progression was FAPE and students were not entitled to additional support services beyond that de minimis standard.

What should be the standard in public schools is the antithesis of the Rowley decision, and is more in line with Endrew F. v. Douglas County School District. Under Endrew, individualized education programs must be appropriately ambitious in light of the child’s circumstances and have challenging objectives. Meaningful and challenging progress means more than merely “adequate” or non-diminishing education - the de minimis standard many school districts took from Rowley, and parents may have more leverage in advocating for their children seeking justification for the goals and plans in the IEP. Even post-Endrew, there is a substantial risk of students not getting satisfactory IEP goals and plans that will meaningfully advance their education. The Department of Education should publish clear guidelines, which Congress can codify that better guide school districts in their formulation of IEPs. 

Perez v. Sturgis Public Schools streamlines the means for obtaining relief when school districts are unable to provide a FAPE. In both Endrew and Perez, families were allowed to enroll their children in private schools because of the districts’ unwillingness to provide a FAPE for their children with the tuition paid by the district, and in Endrew, additional damages. While Perez is now remanded back to the lower courts, it streamlines how families might be able to recover from harms in the future and makes relief more accessible for families with few resources.

Note: This blog and podcast are not legal advice. If you have a legal question, please contact a local attorney or bar association for assistance.

Full podcast episode linked below!