# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
By Amanda Morin

At a glance

Related services help kids meet educational goals, but these services aren't necessarily specialized instruction.

Related services are typically part of a child's Individualized Education Program (IEP).

Some kids receive related services through a 504 plan.

Learn more about these types of services and how kids who learn and think differently get them.

What are related services?

Related services are most often part of an IEP. Kids usually get them along with some sort of specialized instruction, as part of special education. But in some schools, they are the special instruction. That may happen when a child doesn't get any other services.

The main goal of these services isn't to offer special education. It's to help kids benefit from general education. They help make it easier for kids to participate in class and in afterschool activities.

For some kids, that might mean transportation services. For others, it's the help the classroom teacher gets from a professional to create and use a behavior plan.

How students qualify for related services

Often, related services go hand in hand with special education. But some kids might only need the related service.

Different states and school districts deal with this in different ways. The federal law says states can decide to allow related services to be the only form of special education a child gets. In that case, the related service is a child's specialized instruction.

There may be other cases where kids don't qualify for special education. But they can still get related services under autodefensa. This might happen when a child's challenges don't have an effect on learning.

Here's an example. A child with dyspraxia may need occupational therapy to help with motor planning. But this child doesn't need academic help. So occupational therapy may be provided under a 504 plan instead of an IEP.

What related services can include

Related services are as varied and individual as the kids who use them. The federal special education law, Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, lists the following as possible related services:

Speech-language and audiology services

Interpreting services

Psychological services

Occupational and physical therapy

Recreation, including therapeutic recreation

Early identification and evaluation of disabilities in children

Counseling services, including rehabilitation counseling

Orientation and mobility

Medical services (but only for diagnostic or evaluation purposes, not for ongoing treatment)

School health and/or school nurse services

Social work services

Parent counseling and training

It's important to know that if there's a service your child needs and it's not on the list, such as assistive technology, IDEA says the team should consider it.

Key takeaways

Speech-language, occupational, and physical therapy are all examples of related services.

IDEA names many types of related services, but a child's team decides which services are necessary.

In some cases, related services are the only special education services a child might need.

Tell us what interests you

About the author

About the author

Amanda Morin is the director of thought leadership at Understood and author of "The Everything Parent's Guide to Special Education." She worked as a classroom teacher and early intervention specialist for more than a decade.

Reviewed by

Reviewed by

Andrea M. Spencer, PhD has extensive leadership experience in programs serving student with disabilities and at risk of failure.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
What Are Related Services in Special Education

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Related services help kids meet educational goals, but these services aren't necessarily specialized instruction. Related services are typically part of a child's Individualized Education Program (IEP). Some kids receive related services through a 504 plan. Learn more about these types of services and how kids who learn and think differently get them.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Short-and-Sweet IEP Overview | Center for Parent Information and Resources

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.provider_name
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Topic Areas: Assistive Technology

Summary

The Office of Educational Technology and the Office of Special Education Programs are pleased to share the below guidance in support of children with disabilities who need assistive technology (AT) devices and services for meaningful access and engagement in education.

Dear Colleague Letter

A Dear Colleague Letter on the provision of assistive technology devices and services for children with disabilities under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA).

Myths and Facts Surrounding Assistive Technology Devices and Services (PDF) is designed to increase understanding of the IDEA's AT requirements, dispel common misconceptions regarding AT, and provide examples of the use of AT devices and services for children with disabilities and to highlight the different requirements under Part C and Part B of IDEA.

Resumen

La Oficina de Tecnología Educativa y la Oficina de Programas de Educación Especial se complacen en compartir la guía de abajo para apoyar niños con discapacidades que necesitan aparatos y servicios de tecnología de asistencia (AT) con acceso significativo y participación en la educación.

Carta a los Colegas

Una carta a los colegas estimados sobre la provisión de dispositivos y servicios de tecnología de asistencia para niños con discapacidades bajo la Ley de Educación para Personas con Discapacidades (IDEA).

AT Mitos y Realidades

Mitos y Realidades sobre los dispositivos y servicios de la tecnología de asistencia está diseñado para comprender mejor los requisitos de la AT de la IDEA, disipar conceptos erróneos comunes con respecto a la AT, proporcionar ejemplos del uso de los dispositivos y servicios de la AT para niños con discapacidades y resaltar los diferentes requisitos bajo la Parte C y la Parte B de IDEA.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Assistive Technology Devices and Services for Children With Disabilities Under the IDEA - Individuals with Disabilities Education Act

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The Office of Educational Technology and the Office of Special Education Programs released guidance in support of children with disabilities who need assistive technology (AT) devices and services for meaningful access and engagement in education.

# data[].attributes.body
NASISP – National Alliance of Specialized Instructional Support Personnel

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
NASISP: WORKING TOGETHER FOR STUDENT AND SCHOOL SUCCESS

The National Alliance of Specialized Instructional Support Personnel (NASISP) represents more than one million Specialized Instructional Support Personnel (SISP) nationwide. SISP professionals provide and support school-based prevention and intervention services to address barriers to educational success, ensure positive conditions for learning, and help all students achieve academically and ultimately become productive citizens. SISP works with teachers, administrators, and parents to ensure that all students are successful in school. NASISP seeks to empower SISP professionals by...

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
NASISP - National Alliance of Specialized Instructional Support Personnel

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The National Alliance of Specialized Instructional Support Personnel (NASISP) represents more than one million Specialized Instructional Support Personnel (SISP) nationwide. SISP professionals provide and support school-based prevention and intervention services to address barriers to educational success, ensure positive conditions for learning, and help all students achieve academically and ultimately become productive citizens.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Page 5: Implementing the IEP

Procedural Requirements Guidelines

Implement the special education services as written in the IEP

Ensure that parents are meaningfully involved in the IEP process

Adhere to required timelines

The purpose of the implementation stage of the IEP process is to deliver the services and supports outlined in a student's IEP. To ensure that these services and supports are implemented correctly, the school administrator should make sure that:

Parents are meaningfully involved in the IEP's implementation

School personnel understand their responsibilities and have the skills and training necessary to deliver the supports and services as outlined in the IEP (i.e., with fidelity)

The degree to which an intervention is implemented accurately, following the guidelines of its developers.

Legislation and Litigation

School leaders who do not adhere to these procedural guidelines can face serious consequences.

In Kay Williams v. Cabell County Board of Education (1996), a school principal was removed in part due to failures to exercise leadership responsibilities, ensure that teachers implemented the IEP, and cooperate with parents.

In Van Duyn v. Baker School District 5J (2007), the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit found that a school district had denied FAPE when it provided only slightly more than half the number of hours of math instruction per week called for in a student's IEP. According to the court, even if an IEP meets the procedural and substantive requirements of the IDEA, a school may still violate a student's right to FAPE if a material or important part of the IEP was not implemented.

Engage Parents

The Supreme Court's decisions in Rowley (1982) and Endrew F. (2017) emphasized the importance of the collaboration between school personnel and a student's parents throughout the IEP process. These case decisions provide evidence that meaningfully involving parents in the IEP process is vigorously protected by the courts. For parents to be meaningfully involved in the implementation of the IEP, the school administrator needs to ensure that systems and processes are in place to:

Establish and maintain open lines of communication-Because parents are valuable resources, any information they share should be considered. For example, when a student is having difficulty at school, the parent can often offer insight and can be instrumental in identifying possible reasons and solutions.

Frequently inform the parents of their child's progress toward meeting her IEP goals and objectives.

Involve parents in any changes to their child's IEP.

Tip

About a week after the meeting and once implementation begins, it is a good idea to check with the parents to see if they have any questions.

Breanne Venios describes how her school facilitates parent communication (time: 1:24).

Transcript: Breanne Venios

Our school facilitates parents' communicating any changes in student progress or behavior by keeping the lines of communication open. We have teams here at our school so the parent knows exactly what teachers their child has. We encourage them to email if they have a concern. Some of our students actually have written in their IEP that the learning-support teacher will send daily updates. The regular ed teachers keep a running document of what had happened during that day, usually for behaviors, and then the parent is kept in the loop because they get a daily email, which I'm usually CCed on just so that we can all see what's going on and see what next steps we have to do. Our teams are highly encouraged to do team meetings throughout the year, not just when there is a concern. We try to be more proactive rather than reactive. We also do what we call circle of support meetings that some of our parents prefer to have quarterly meetings instead of just the yearly IEP meetings. Once per marking period, they would be able to just come in for a team meeting and get updates that way or talk about any concerns that they have. So we really try to keep our lines of communication open. Our teachers are also reaching out to the parents, because sometimes parents don't know how to reach out to our teachers.

Support School Personnel

For Your Information

Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) is a federal law, the purpose of which is to protect the privacy of a student's personally identifiable information (PII), such as educational records. To comply with FERPA, schools require a parent's or guardian's signature to release a student's educational record.

IDEA requires that school personnel begin to deliver the services outlined in the IEP as soon as possible. To guarantee there is no delay, the school administrator should make sure all individuals involved in implementation:

Have access to the IEP: Although they are confidential documents, IEPs should be shared (either in hard copy or electronically) with anyone responsible for the provision of services. This includes the special and general education teachers, related service providers, paraprofessionals, and other relevant school staff (e.g., administrative staff, bus drivers, substitute teachers). Although sometimes misconstrued as such, sharing a student's IEP with relevant parties is not a violation of the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA). However, because of confusion and misperceptions surrounding what is permissible and what is not, it's important that the school administrator remind those with access to the IEP that it is a confidential document and periodically meet with them to review their responsibilities regarding confidentiality.

Although school administrators might be tempted to provide a mere summary or overview of the IEP, it's important that everyone involved in the implementation of services and supports have the opportunity to read the document in its entirety. Similarly, merely providing access to the complete text of the IEP is not sufficient either. It is crucial to make sure that service providers fully understand the information contained in the IEP and the connections among its many components (e.g., PLAAFPs, goals, services).

Know their responsibilities for IEP implementation: To make certain that the IEP is implemented as intended-and thus to maximize the likelihood that the student will meet the outlined goals-every individual who provides services to the student must understand her or his responsibilities. These might involve providing specialized instruction for a specified portion of the day, providing accommodations, collecting and reporting progress monitoring data, or communicating a student's progress to her parents, among other tasks. If for whatever reason a member or members of the IEP team were unable to attend the IEP meeting, school administrators might want to consider establishing a process by which those parties can indicate that they have read the IEP and understand their individual responsibilities.

Are informed of the accommodations, modifications, and supports that must be provided to the student: Because students sometimes require different accommodations, modifications, and supports throughout the day, each service provider should be aware of those he is responsible for implementing. One way to do this is to use a form to record a student's IEP goals and the services and supports needed for the student to achieve those goals in different content areas. This form should be completed for each individual who will be implementing these supports. Following the meeting, it can be shared with relevant school personnel to help them understand their responsibilities to ensure the IEP is implemented as intended. Following is a form that school leaders can use to accomplish this.
IEP Implementation: School Personnel Responsibilities

Further, the school administrator is responsible for providing needed support for educators so that they can effectively deliver the services and supports outlined in the IEP. She can do so by 1) monitoring educators' professional development (PD) needs and providing training, and 2) creating structures and opportunities for collaboration.

IEP process

IEP content

Implementing IEPs with fidelity

Monitoring student progress and collecting data

Submitting progress reports

Inclusive practices

Evidence-based instructional practices

Instructional and testing accommodations

Modifications

Assistive technology

Evidence-based behavioral strategies

Behavioral implementation plans (BIPs)

Positive behavioral intervention and support (PBIS)

Providing effective PD and opportunities for educators to collaborate is a great starting point for helping to ensure that a student's IEP is implemented correctly. However, these activities do not guarantee that educators will implement the services and supports outlined in the IEP as intended. Further, these activities alone do not guarantee appropriate student progress. For this reason, it is critical that the school administrator have processes in place to monitor both implementation fidelity and student progress. The following page provides more information on how to accomplish these tasks. But first, Breanne Venios discusses access to IEPs at her school, the structures that have been put in place to provide PD, and ways to foster collaboration.

<
Breanne Venios
Principal, Spring Cove Middle School
Roaring Spring, PA

Transcript: Breanne Venios - Access to IEPs

Access for IEPs at our school vary. Any learning-support teacher has access to the program that we use to generate the IEPs, so they have a login and password for that. The administrators have a login and password for that as well, so I can go in at any time and pull up any student's IEP. Our regular ed teachers read all of the IEPs and then they sign off that they've read and understood them. Our learning-support teachers make what we call a cheatsheet, so any of the specially designed instruction that they might need or the accommodations they make the child's name and then the things that the teacher has to implement. So if it's eliminating an answer choice or small-group testing, so that's a cheatsheet that the teachers are given so that they can make sure that they're implementing all of that. If we have a substitute teacher in, the teachers leave a note for them, if needed. For instance, if there is a child who needs frequent breaks and that is written in their IEP, obviously we need to let the substitute know that. If there is a child who has a crisis plan, we need to let the substitute know that so that they can obviously respond appropriately. We do give information, as needed, for our guests in the building, but other than that if a teacher needs to know anything further about the IEP they are able to come down. They are in a locked student file, but they can view the IEP when they need it, but they don't have the actual copy in their room.

Another way that we ensure all relevant staff know their responsibilities for IEP implementation is, at the beginning of the year, we do transitional meetings with our learning-support teacher and the regular ed teachers, because they do work very closely as a team. The 6th-grade teacher will talk about the students with the 7th-grade learning-support teacher and then that learning-support teacher will meet with a team of 7th-grade teachers so that way they can have a heads-up of any needs. If they have a student who has a specific behavioral plan or a crisis plan, they would know that from the beginning of the year. The 6th-grade teacher can give feedback to the 7th-grade teachers, and the 7th-grade teacher can give feedback to the 8th-grade teachers, because they know that student the best so they can better prepare the teachers. So we do transitional meetings in addition to the other things that we've done.

Transcript: Breanne Venios - Professional Development

We monitor PD multiple ways. We do have district-required professional development. Usually at the beginning of the year, we have a guest come and address the whole staff on anything from responding to crisis situations, trauma, or de-escalation techniques. We do that as a district, but one thing that I try to do as a building leader is just be in the know with my teachers. I attend all of the team meetings. I try to be in the classrooms as much as possible. I hear what they ask, I hear what they need, and I talk to my learning-support teachers a lot. So if they have concerns, they don't necessarily feel it's appropriate for them sometimes to address teachers, so they'll let me know and I can do that. And then if I hear the same concern over and over again, I know that that needs to be addressed as a staff, but I have conversations with the teams. I use data collection. I always say it has to be observable data. So if I see a concern through that, I can address it. We have at-risk meetings. If one of our students is not making progress, we bring that up at the at-risk meeting that we have every quarter, and we ask why that student's not making progress. And if I see a consistency there that might be something that the teachers aren't doing or implementing then I can address that and give them the professional development that they need.

But it always goes back to the student's progress. If they're not making progress, we have to find out why. So I use that and then I'll make our in-services. I did a whole year teaching the teachers about differentiated instruction whenever we went from homogeneous grouping to heterogeneously grouping. So I knew that that was something that they would need, so I made that our focus. So I try to take data, and I try to see what needs they need and make it relevant for them. If I have one or two teachers that may be struggling with implementing one of the accommodations or they're not understanding why something has to happen, I always sit down with them one-on-one and discuss that. It always starts with a discussion, and I explain the whys. If we are doing something and we don't know why then we need to make sure we know why. So maybe I pull up the IEP and I show them specifically what are the goals? What are we looking at? If they don't take our conversation and change from that then my job is to hold them accountable. It's not that we want to give them more work. It's not that we just want to implement something for no reason. It's what's best for the child.

Transcript: Breanne Venios - Collaborating

We have some structures in place to provide opportunities for educator collaboration such as team and content-area meetings. One day every other week, they meet as a 6th-grade team, a 7th-grade team, and then an 8th-grade team. And then on the opposite weeks, they meet with their content-area teachers. So math meets together, English together, and so on. During those meetings, there is a conversation of any student concerns and what we're doing to assist with student concerns, whether that be discussing some classroom management techniques or how are they doing in your class, what are you doing if they're struggling with this. So we have those conversations, and also, when possible, I like to give planning periods together with the co-teachers. So if our learning-support teacher is co-teaching with the English teacher, I try to give them a common plan. It doesn't always, unfortunately, work out that way, but that way it's more meaningful for them, because they can plan together. At the end of the day, we have what we call activity periods, so they use that time together to meet. So we have pockets within the day that they can get together and collaborate, but we definitely have set time for our team meetings and our content-area meetings.

For Your Information

There are several serious procedural errors that IEP teams should avoid when implementing the IEP. These include:

Failing to monitor a student's progress

Failing to implement the student's services and supports with fidelity

Failing to involve the student's parents

The last several pages of this module have included information about common errors related to the content on those pages. The handout below offers a combined list of these errors along with more detailed information about each.
IEP Process: Common Errors

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Implement the special education services as written in the IEP Ensure that parents are meaningfully involved in the IEP process Adhere to required timelines The purpose of the implementation stage of the IEP process is to deliver the services and supports outlined in a student's IEP.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
What IDEA Says

ASHA members have reported that some local education agencies (LEAs) place restrictions on service delivery choices (e.g., limit speech-language services to small-group pull-out intervention only, require classroom-based services only, allow only direct services). This prevents the individualized education program (IEP) team from developing an education program that meets the individual needs of the child, as services must meet a predetermined format, rather than reflect the needs of the child. Furthermore, caseloads become inflated with children making limited or no progress due to inappropriate delivery of services.

IDEA Part B Regulations do not fully address some member questions regarding service delivery options. Therefore, ASHA requested clarification and guidance on this issue in letter addressed to the Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP) of the U.S. Department of Education (ED). ASHA noted in our request that the regulations address this issue within the context of the continuum of alternative placements. For example, the Discussion/Comments Section of the final regulations state that:

"...placement decisions must be based on the individual needs of each child with a disability. Public agencies, therefore, must not make placement decisions based on a public agency's needs or available resources, including budgetary considerations and the ability of the public agency to hire and recruit qualified staff;"

"...placement decisions for all children with disabilities must be made on an individual basis...this requirement for the continuum [of alternative placements] reinforces the importance of the individualized inquiry, not a 'one size fits all' approach;"

"...placement decisions must be determined on an individual case-by-case basis depending on each child's unique educational needs and circumstances and based on the child's IEP;" and

"...in all cases, placement decisions must be individually determined on the basis of each child's abilities and needs and each child's IEP, and not solely on factors such as category of disability, severity of disability, availability of special education and related services, configuration of the service delivery system, availability of space, or administrative convenience."

OSEP responded [PDF] by reiterating the regulations and stating that the IEP team is responsible for developing a child's IEP, including determining the anticipated frequency, location, and duration of the services. They noted that ASHA's examples (e.g., requiring small-group instruction, allowing direct services only) "are matters for consideration by the IEP team, based on a child's individual and unique needs, and cannot be made as a matter of general policy by administrators, teachers or others apart from the IEP team process."

Implications for ASHA Members

This guidance supports the roles of speech-language pathologists, as part of the IEP team, in determining the type(s) of service delivery that will best meet the individual needs of the child and support progress toward meeting IEP goals. That determination cannot be made as a matter of local or state policy, and cannot be predetermined or based solely on factors such as disability category or severity, availability of space or staff, budgetary considerations, or administrative convenience.

What ASHA Members Can Do

If members find themselves limited in service delivery options by local or state policies, they should engage in advocacy efforts to change those policies or practices considering OSEP's clear statements on this issue. Advocacy may involve working with administrators or building teams for local change, or through their state associations for change at the state level.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
IDEA Part B: Continuum of Service Delivery Options

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Some local education agencies place restrictions on service delivery choices (e.g., limit speech-language services to small-group pull-out intervention only, require classroom-based services only, or allow only direct services) which prevents the individualized education program team from developing an education program that meets the individual needs of the child.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.provider_name
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
300.101 Free appropriate public education (FAPE).

(a) General. A free appropriate public education must be available to all children residing in the State between the ages of 3 and 21, inclusive, including children with disabilities who have been suspended or expelled from school, as provided for in §300.530(d).

(b) FAPE for children beginning at age 3.

(1) Each State must ensure that-

(i) The obligation to make FAPE available to each eligible child residing in the State begins no later than the child's third birthday; and

(ii) An IEP or an IFSP is in effect for the child by that date, in accordance with §300.323(b).

(2) If a child's third birthday occurs during the summer, the child's IEP Team shall determine the date when services under the IEP or IFSP will begin.

(c) Children advancing from grade to grade.

(1) Each State must ensure that FAPE is available to any individual child with a disability who needs special education and related services, even though the child has not failed or been retained in a course or grade, and is advancing from grade to grade.

(2) The determination that a child described in paragraph (a) of this section is eligible under this part, must be made on an individual basis by the group responsible within the child's LEA for making eligibility determinations.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Sec. 300.101 Free appropriate public education (FAPE) - Individuals with Disabilities Education Act

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
300.101 Free appropriate public education (FAPE). (a) General. A free appropriate public education must be available to all children residing in the State between the ages of 3 and 21, inclusive, including children with disabilities who have been suspended or expelled from school, as provided for in §300.530(d).

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.provider_name
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
A A A

Before the EHA's enactment, the fate of many individuals with disabilities was likely dim. Many individuals lived in state institutions for persons with intellectual disabilities or mental illness. Many of these restrictive settings provided only minimal food, clothing, and shelter, and persons with disabilities were often merely accommodated rather than assessed, educated and rehabilitated.

Further, most families were not afforded the opportunity to take part in planning or placement decisions regarding their child, and resources were not available to enable children with significant disabilities to live at home and receive an education at neighborhood schools in their community.

In the 1950s and 1960s, the federal government, with the strong support and advocacy of family associations, began to develop and validate practices for children with disabilities and their families. These practices laid the foundation for implementing effective programs and services of early intervention and special education in states and localities across the country.

Early federal legislation supported improved programs and services. Notable examples included:

the Training of Professional Personnel Act of 1959 (Public Law 86-158), which helped train leaders to educate children with mental retardation*;

the Captioned Films Acts of 1958 (Public Law 85-905), the training provisions for teachers of students with mental retardation* (Public Law 85-926), and 1961 (Public Law 87-715), which supported the production and distribution of accessible films;

the Teachers of the Deaf Act of 1961 (Public Law 87-276), which trained instructional personnel for children who were deaf or hard of hearing;

the Mental Retardation Facilities and Community Mental Health Centers Construction Act of 1963 (Public Law 88-164) expanded previous specific training programs to include training across all disability areas;

the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (Public Law 89-10) and the State Schools Act (Public Law 89-313) provided states with direct grant assistance to help educate children with disabilities; and

the Handicapped Children's Early Education Assistance Act of 1968 (Public Law 90-538) and the Economic Opportunities Amendments of 1972 (Public Law 92-424) authorized support for, respectively, exemplary early childhood programs and increased Head Start enrollment for young children with disabilities.

Landmark court decisions further advanced increased educational opportunities for children with disabilities. For example, the Pennsylvania Association for Retarded Citizens v. Commonwealth (1971) and Mills v. Board of Education of the District of Columbia (1972) established the responsibility of states and localities to educate children with disabilities.

* A 2017 revision reflected changes made to the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act by Rosa's Law, which replaces references to "mental retardation" in Federal law with "intellectual disability" or "intellectual disabilities."

On November 29, 1975, President Gerald Ford signed into law the Education for All Handicapped Children Act ( Public Law 94-142), or the EHA. The EHA guaranteed a free, appropriate public education, or FAPE, to each child with a disability in every state and locality across the country.

The four purposes of the EHA were:

to assure that all children with disabilities have available to them...a free appropriate public education which emphasizes special education and related services designed to meet their unique needs,

to assure that the rights of children with disabilities and their parents...are protected,

to assist States and localities to provide for the education of all children with disabilities, and

to assess and assure the effectiveness of efforts to educate all children with disabilities.

The law authorized financial incentives to enable states and localities to comply with the EHA.

The EHA was a response to Congressional concern for two groups of children: the more than 1 million children with disabilities excluded entirely from the education system and the children with disabilities who had only limited access to the education system and were therefore denied an appropriate education. This latter group comprised more than half of all children with disabilities who were living in the U.S. at that time.

Facts and Figures

In the 1976-77 school year, 3,694,000 students aged 3 through 21 were served under the EHA.

To achieve the national goals for access to education for all children with disabilities, several special issues and special populations required federal attention. Key amendments to the law in the 1980s and 1990s reflected these national concerns.

Reauthorizations

The 1986 reauthorization (Public Law 99-457) addressed early intervention and mandated that individual states provide services to families of children born with disabilities from the time they are born. Previously, these services were not available until a child reached the age of three.

The 1990 reauthorization (Public Law 110-476) changed the law's name from EHA to the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, or IDEA. It also added traumatic brain injury and autism as new disability categories. Additionally, Congress mandated that as a part of a student's individualized education program (IEP), an individual transition plan (ITP) must be developed to help the student transition to post-secondary life.

The 1997 (Public Law 105-17) reauthorization articulated a new challenge to improve results for children with disabilities and their families. This included an emphasis on access to the general curriculum. Additionally, states were given the authority to expand the "developmental delay" definition to also include students up to age nine. The law also required parents be provided an opportunity to attempt to resolve disputes with schools and local educational agencies (LEAs) through mediation and provided a process for doing so.

Birth Through Age 2

The 1980s saw a national concern for young children with disabilities and their families. While the EHA mandated programs and services for children 3 to 21 years that were consistent with state law, the 1986 amendments to the EHA mandated that states provide programs and services from birth.

These early intervention and preschool programs prepared young children with disabilities to meet the academic and social challenges that lie ahead of them, both while in school and in later life.

Facts and Figures

In the 1980-81 school year, 4,144,000 students aged 3 through 21 were served under EHA. By the 1990-91 school year, 4,710,000 infants, toddlers, children, and youth with disabilities from birth through age 21 were served under IDEA.

Ages 3 Through 21

The 1980s and 1990s saw a push to expand the opportunities for educating children with disabilities in the least restrictive environment. For example, in the early 1980s, EHA supported several "Severely Handicapped Institutes" to develop and validate effective approaches for integrating children with significant disabilities with their non-disabled family members at home and their non-disabled classmates at school.

Model projects' efforts led the way for millions of children with significant disabilities to attend their neighborhood schools and learn the life skills needed for full, active participation in integrated activities with their family members, friends, neighbors and co-workers.

Additionally, in 1982, the U.S. Supreme Court addressed for the first time, what is meant by a free appropriate public education under EHA. In Hendrick Hudson Dist. Bd. Of Ed. v. Rowley, the Supreme Court concluded that to meet its obligation to provide FAPE, the school district must provide access to specialized instruction and related services which are individually designed to provide educational benefit to the child with a disability. In 2017, the Court revisited the question of what level of educational benefit the school district must confer on children with disabilities to provide FAPE, as noted in Endrew F. v. Douglas County School District Re-1 (2017) below.

The law has also supported the preparation of students for vocational success through new and improved transition programs.

The law's 1983 amendments ( Public Law 98-199), 1990 amendments ( Public Law 101-476) and 1997 amendments ( Public Law 105-17) supported initiatives for transition services from high school to adult living.

Because of these mandates, each transition-aged student's IEP must include transition plans or procedures for:

Identifying appropriate employment and other postschool adult living objectives for the student;

Referring the student to appropriate community agencies; and

Linking the student to available community resources, including job placement and other follow-up services.

The IEP must also specifically designate who is responsible for each transition activity.

Facts and Figures

Of student with disabilities ages 14 through 21 who were known to have left school in the 1994-95 school year:

52% graduated with a regular diploma,

63% graduated with a regular diploma or certificate of completion, and

34% dropped out.

In 2004, the IDEA reauthorization aligned the IDEA with the No Child Left Behind Act requirements.

The 2004 reauthorization called for:

Early intervening services for children not currently identified as needing special education but who need additional academic and behavioral support to succeed in a general education environment,

Greater accountability and improved educational outcomes, and

Raised standards for instructors who teach special education classes.

The 2000s and 2010s saw revised regulations to the IDEA. The department issued these periodic revisions to address the implementation and interpretation of the IDEA.

In August 2006, the department issued regulations necessitated by the 2004 reauthorization. The 2006 IDEA regulations required schools to use research-based interventions in the process of assisting students with learning difficulties or determining eligibility for special education. The 2006 regulations also addressed other new requirements included in the 2004 reauthorization, such as:

The resolution process required when a parent files a due process complaint, and

Shifting the responsibility to provide equitable services for parentally-placed private school children with disabilities to the local educational agency (LEA) in which the private school is located.

In 2008, the department issued regulations it determined were needed to clarify and strengthen effective implementation and administration of IDEA programs. These IDEA regulations addressed:

Parental consent for continued special education and related services;

Non-attorney representation in due process hearings;

State monitoring, technical assistance, and enforcement;

Allocation of funds; and

Positive efforts to employ and advance in employment individuals with disabilities.

Both 2011 and 2013 regulations included clarifications or revisions to the IDEA for infants and toddlers with disabilities programs. Additionally, the 2013 regulations revised the parental consent requirements related to a child's or parent's public benefits and ensured parent of children with disabilities are specifically informed of all their legal protections when public agencies seek access to public benefits or insurance to pay for services required under the IDEA.

The 2015 revisions revised regulations governing the requirement that LEAs maintain fiscal effort; removed the authority for states to define modified academic achievement standards and develop alternate assessments based in those modified academic achievement standards or eligible students with disabilities.

The department revised the regulations in 2016 with the goal of promoting equity under IDEA. The revised regulations help ensure that states meaningfully identify LEAs with significant disproportionality and that states assist LEAs in ensuring that children with disabilities are properly identified for services, receive necessary services in the least restrictive environment.

The 2016 revised regulation also helps ensure children with disabilities are not disproportionately removed from their educational placements by disciplinary removals. The changes were necessary to address the well-documented and detrimental over-identification of certain students for special education services, with particular concern that over-identification results in children being placed in more restrictive environments and not taught to challenging academic standards.

Notably, a 2017 revision reflected changes made to the IDEA by Rosa's Law, which replaces references to "mental retardation" in Federal law with "intellectual disability" or "intellectual disabilities." Other 2017 revisions removed and revised IDEA definitions based on the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (ESEA), as amended by the Every Student Succeeds Act of 2015 (ESSA).

In March 2017, the Supreme Court ruled on a landmark case that defines the scope of FAPE requirements under IDEA. In Endrew F. v. Douglas County School District Re-1, the Supreme Court determined that "[t]o meet its substantive obligation under the IDEA, a school must offer an IEP reasonably calculated 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."

Facts and Figures

Birth Through Age 2

In 2005-06, 299,048 infants and toddlers with disabilities from birth through age 2 were served under IDEA, Part C. By 2018-19, 409,315 infants and toddlers with disabilities from birth through age 2 were served under IDEA, Part C.

Ages 3 Through 21

In the 2018-19 school year, 7,130,238 students with disabilities from 3 through 21 were served under IDEA, Part B.

In the 2017-18 school year, 72.7% of students with disabilities, age 14-21, exiting school graduated with a regular high school diploma and 16% dropped out.

Educators/Service Providers

In the 2005-06 school year, 695,466 teachers and related service personnel were employed to serve students age 3 through 21. By the 2017-18 school year, 942,446 teachers and related service personnel were employed to serve students age 3 through 21.

Families

From the beginning of special education legislation, families of children with disabilities have been considered important partners in meeting the needs of children with disabilities.

IDEA includes key principles to guide families and professionals to work together to enhance the educational opportunities for their children.

IDEA requires active parent participation throughout the educational process including the development of the child's IEP.

IDEA 1997 amendments mandated that schools report progress to parents of children with disabilities as frequently as they report to parents of non-disabled children. The intent was to maintain an equal and respectful partnership between schools and families.

Educators and Service Providers

IDEA has continued the long-standing federal commitment to provide an adequate supply of qualified teachers.

Today, hundreds of thousands of professionals specializing in early childhood and special education are being trained with IDEA support. These professionals include early intervention staff, classroom teachers, therapists, counselors, psychologists, program administrators, and other professionals who will work with future generations of children with disabilities and their families.

IDEA has supported states and localities in meeting their identified challenges for personnel preparation.

For example, IDEA has supported local communities who were developing and implementing early childhood programs; schools serving students with low-incidence disabilities, such as children who are blind or deaf or children with autism or traumatic brain injury; and schools in rural or large urban areas, where financial and other resources are often scarce.

State Lead Agencies, State Educational Agencies, and Local Educational Agencies

The IDEA requires states and other public agencies to implement programs designed to improve results for infants, toddlers, children and youth with disabilities and their families.

Additionally, the IDEA allows for the award of annual formula grants to states to support early intervention services for infants and toddlers with disabilities and their families, and the provision of special education and related services to preschool children ages three through five, and children and youth with disabilities

Discretionary Grant Recipients

IDEA discretionary grants award grants through a competitive process to state educational agencies, institutions of higher education, and other nonprofit organizations to support technical assistance and dissemination, technology and media services, state personnel development grants, personnel preparation, state data collections, and parent-training and information centers.

U.S. Department of Education, Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services. "History: Twenty-Five Years of Progress in Educating Children With Disabilities Through IDEA."

U.S. Department of Education, Office of Special Education Programs, Annual Report to Congress on the Implementation of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, selected years, 1979 through 2019.

U.S. Department of Education, EDFacts Data Warehouse (EDW): "IDEA Part B Personnel Collection" 2011-12 to 2017-18. Data from 2011 includes US and Outlying areas data from 2012 - 2017 includes the US, Outlying Areas, and Freely Associated States.

U.S. Department of Education, EDFacts Data Warehouse (EDW): "IDEA Part B Exiting Collection," selected years, 1996 through 2018.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
A History of the Individuals With Disabilities Education Act

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Congress enacted the Education for All Handicapped Children Act, now the IDEA, in 1975 to support states and localities in protecting the rights of, meeting the individual needs of, and improving the results for infants, toddlers, children, and youth with disabilities and their families.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
PACER Center Advocate Pat Anderson looks at ways to effectively communicate with your child's IEP Team and discusses the Due Process options in these videos.

Parents of children with disabilities often ask:

Can the school send my child home before the end of the school day?

Can the school district suspend my child?

Can the school district expel my child?

What happens to my child's educational services if he or she is sent home, suspended, or expelled?

This interactive guide will answer these and many other questions. Whether your child is on an Individualized Education Plan (IEP) or a Section 504 Plan, or if you suspect that your child has a disability that affects his or her behavior at school, this guide will help you understand the complex disciplinary process for Minnesota public school children with disabilities.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.keywords[]
blind deaf autistic children education programs

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Today PACER offers more than 30 programs for parents, students, professionals and other parent organizations. PACER is staffed primarily by parents of children with disabilities dedicated to educating other parents and improving the lives of children with disabilities throughout Minnesota.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
At a glance

IDEA is the nation's special education law.

Schools must find and evaluate students thought to have disabilities - at no cost to families.

To qualify for IDEA services, a child must have a disability and need special education to make progress in school.

To get special education services for a child, you have to follow a legal process. The most important law for this process is the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA).

IDEA is the nation's special education law. It gives rights and protections to kids with disabilities. It covers them from birth through high school graduation or age 21 (whichever comes first). Parents and legal guardians also have rights under the law.

IDEA places two big responsibilities on states and their public schools.

Schools must find and evaluate students who may have disabilities, at no cost to families. This is known as Child Find. If a child has a qualifying disability, schools must offer special education and related services (like speech therapy and counseling) to meet the child's unique needs. These are provided through an Individualized Education Program (IEP). The goal is to help students make progress in school.

Second, schools have to give parents a voice in their child's education. At every point in the process, IDEA gives parents specific rights and protections. These are called procedural safeguards. For example, one safeguard is that a school must get consent from parents before providing services to kids.

The reach of IDEA goes beyond traditional public schools. It includes public magnet and charter schools. The law also provides early intervention services to infants and toddlers up to age 3. Finally, IDEA may impact some students in private schools.

Dive deeper

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
What is the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA)?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
What is the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA)? IDEA is a federal law that lays out children's rights in special education. Here's how it works.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Current and accurate as of January 2022
In Spanish | En español

The nation's special education law is called the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, or IDEA. As part of making special education and related services available to children with disabilities in the public schools, Part B of IDEA defines the term "child with a disability." That definition includes specific disability terms, which are also defined by IDEA, as this webpage describes.

The IDEA's disability terms and definitions guide how States in their own turn define disability and who is eligible for a free appropriate public education under special education law. The definitions of these specific disability terms from the IDEA regulations are shown beneath each term listed below. Note, in order to fully meet the definition (and eligibility for special education and related services) as a "child with a disability," a child's educational performance must be adversely affected due to the disability.

__________________________________________________
Quick-Jump Links

_________________________________________________

In the list below, if a disability term is linked, clicking on the link will take you to a fact sheet for that particular disability and to other related information.
1. Autism...
...means a developmental disability significantly affecting verbal and nonverbal communication and social interaction, generally evident before age three, that adversely affects a child's educational performance. Other characteristics often associated with autism are engaging in repetitive activities and stereotyped movements, resistance to environmental change or change in daily routines, and unusual responses to sensory experiences. The term autism does not apply if the child's educational performance is adversely affected primarily because the child has an emotional disturbance, as defined in #5 below.

A child who shows the characteristics of autism after age 3 could be diagnosed as having autism if the criteria above are satisfied.
2. Deaf-Blindness...
...means concomitant [simultaneous] hearing and visual impairments, the combination of which causes such severe communication and other developmental and educational needs that they cannot be accommodated in special education programs solely for children with deafness or children with blindness.

...means a hearing impairment so severe that a child is impaired in processing linguistic information through hearing, with or without amplification, that adversely affects a child's educational performance.

4. Developmental Delay...

...for children from birth to age three (under IDEA Part C) and children from ages three through nine (under IDEA Part B), the term developmental delay, as defined by each State, means a delay in one or more of the following areas: physical development; cognitive development; communication; social or emotional development; or adaptive [behavioral] development.
5. Emotional Disturbance...
...means a condition exhibiting one or more of the following characteristics over a long period of time and to a marked degree that adversely affects a child's educational performance:

(a) An inability to learn that cannot be explained by intellectual, sensory, or health factors.

(b) An inability to build or maintain satisfactory interpersonal relationships with peers and teachers.

(c) Inappropriate types of behavior or feelings under normal circumstances.

(d) A general pervasive mood of unhappiness or depression.

(e) A tendency to develop physical symptoms or fears associated with personal or school problems.

The term includes schizophrenia. The term does not apply to children who are socially maladjusted, unless it is determined that they have an emotional disturbance.
6. Hearing Impairment...
...means an impairment in hearing, whether permanent or fluctuating, that adversely affects a child's educational performance but is not included under the definition of "deafness."
7. Intellectual Disability...
...means significantly subaverage general intellectual functioning, existing concurrently [at the same time] with deficits in adaptive behavior and manifested during the developmental period, that adversely affects a child's educational performance.

( Editor's Note, February 2011: "Intellectual Disability" is a new term in IDEA. Until October 2010, the law used the term "mental retardation." In October 2010, Rosa's Law was signed into law by President Obama. Rosa's Law changed the term to be used in future to "intellectual disability." The definition of the term itself did not change and is what has just been shown above.
8. Multiple Disabilities...
...means concomitant [simultaneous] impairments (such as intellectual disability-blindness, intellectual disability-orthopedic impairment, etc.), the combination of which causes such severe educational needs that they cannot be accommodated in a special education program solely for one of the impairments. The term does not include deaf-blindness.
9. Orthopedic Impairment...
...means a severe orthopedic impairment that adversely affects a child's educational performance. The term includes impairments caused by a congenital anomaly, impairments caused by disease (e.g., poliomyelitis, bone tuberculosis), and impairments from other causes (e.g.,cerebral palsy, amputations, and fractures or burns that cause contractures).
10. Other Health Impairment...
...means having limited strength, vitality, or alertness, including a heightened alertness to environmental stimuli, that results in limited alertness with respect to the educational environment, that-

(a) is due to chronic or acute health problems such as asthma, attention deficit disorder or attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, diabetes, epilepsy, a heart condition, hemophilia, lead poisoning, leukemia, nephritis, rheumatic fever, sickle cell anemia, and Tourette syndrome; and

(b) adversely affects a child's educational performance.
11. Specific Learning Disability...
...means a disorder in one or more of the basic psychological processes involved in understanding or in using language, spoken or written, that may manifest itself in the imperfect ability to listen, think, speak, read, write, spell, or to do mathematical calculations. The term includes such conditions as perceptual disabilities, brain injury, minimal brain dysfunction, dyslexia, and developmental aphasia. The term does not include learning problems that are primarily the result of visual, hearing, or motor disabilities; of intellectual disability; of emotional disturbance; or of environmental, cultural, or economic disadvantage.
12. Speech or Language Impairment...
...means a communication disorder such as stuttering, impaired articulation, a language impairment, or a voice impairment that adversely affects a child's educational performance.
13. Traumatic Brain Injury...
...means an acquired injury to the brain caused by an external physical force, resulting in total or partial functional disability or psychosocial impairment, or both, that adversely affects a child's educational performance. The term applies to open or closed head injuries resulting in impairments in one or more areas, such as cognition; language; memory; attention; reasoning; abstract thinking; judgment; problem-solving; sensory, perceptual, and motor abilities; psychosocial behavior; physical functions; information processing; and speech.

The term does not apply to brain injuries that are congenital or degenerative, or to brain injuries induced by birth trauma.
14. Visual Impairment Including Blindness...
...means an impairment in vision that, even with correction, adversely affects a child's educational performance. The term includes both partial sight and blindness.

_________________
Considering the Meaning of "Adversely Affects"
You may have noticed that the phrase "adversely affects educational performance" appears in most of the disability definitions. This does not mean, however, that a child has to be failing in school to receive special education and related services. According to IDEA, states must make a free appropriate public education available to "any individual child with a disability who needs special education and related services, even if the child has not failed or been retained in a course or grade, and is advancing from grade to grade." [§300.101(c)(1)]

________________________________________________________

**Highly Rated Resource! This resource was reviewed by 3-member panels of Parent Center staff working independently from one another to rate the quality, relevance, and usefulness of CPIR resources. This resource was found to be of "High Quality, High Relevance, High Usefulness" to Parent Centers.
________________________________________

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Categories of Disability Under Part B of IDEA

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Current and accurate as of January 2022 In Spanish | En español The nation's special education law is called the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, or IDEA. As part of making special education and related services available to children with disabilities in the public schools, Part B of IDEA defines the term "child with a disability."