# data[].attributes.body
The Education for all Handicapped Children Act changed everything for exceptional learners in 1975. What was education like for families and exceptional learners before this?

# 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.headline
Who had access to free education before 1975?

# data[].attributes.subject
Who had access to free education before 1975?

# data[].attributes.body
Before 1975, despite free public education becoming normalized in all states, many groups were barred from benefitting. These groups included African Americans, Native Americans, immigrants, and children with disabilities. Children with disabilities stayed at home or were placed into institutions. Students that were placed into institutions received no education. Many people held the belief that they were unable to learn.

Most schools were allowed to deny access to students with disabilities. Schools could do this because of the lack of policies protecting many groups of people.

# data[].attributes.body
Education for all Handicapped Children Act

# data[].attributes.body
"The U.S. has progressed from excluding nearly 1.8 million children with disabilities from public schools prior to EHA implementation to providing more than 8 million children with disabilities with special education and related services designed to meet their individual needs in the 2022-23 school year." (A history of the individuals with disabilities education act, 2024).

# data[].attributes.body
Many families that had children with disabilities pushed the government to enact laws that gave their children access to education.

# data[].attributes.body
Many laws were imperative to the lead-up to the EHA. One that stuck out to me was the Training of Professional Personnel Act of 1959, which helped professionals train to work with students with intellectual disabilities. I found it very interesting that one of the first acts involved teachers. Having personnel that could help students with disabilities was important. If teachers had no training in working with disabilities, these students would not be receiving an appropriate education, which is defined much later.

# data[].attributes.body
Another crucial law that went into effect was the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965. This Act helped states obtain the funds to help educate students with disabilities. This is still going on today; schools receive funding for the number of students receiving additional support for their disability.

# data[].attributes.body
This article explains what led up to the EHA. Many children, not just exceptional learners, could not receive public education. The article also explains that our education system is decentralized, meaning the states have majority control over standards. Having a decentralized system can be challenging, as we want to ensure we uphold high standards for all students across all states! The education system in America continues to struggle with having a decentralized system. It can be difficult to ensure all students receive adequate education when the standards vary from state to state.

# data[].attributes.body
This YouTube video gives an overview of all the laws and landmark cases that eventually led up to the EHA. I found it extremely helpful as it is presented in the sequence in which they happened.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Pennsylvania Association for Retarded Citizens (PARC) v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania | The Public Interest Law Center

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
In 1971, we brought the seminal lawsuit Pennsylvania Association for Retarded Children (PARC) v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, the first right-to-education suit in the country, to overturn that Pennsylvania law and secure a quality education for all children.

# data[].attributes.body
The above link is an article about a landmark case that helped other states move towards inclusivity. PARC (the Pennsylvania Association for Retarded Children ) vs. Pennsylvania was the first lawsuit in the country of its kind. This lawsuit aimed to give students with intellectual disabilities the right to public education. Pennsylvania made a quick decision to provide access to the students paving the way our country as a whole

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Education for All Handicapped Children Act PL 94  142

# data[].attributes.body
This article discusses how people with disabilities have been treated throughout history and in the United States. After the Civil Rights Movement, ". . . More community integration came to be afforded to people with disabilities, with settings that promote independent living. Appropriate education was advocated by U.S. presidents such as Harry Truman, John F. Kennedy, Lyndon Johnson, Ronald Reagan, Gerald Ford, George H. W. Bush, Bill Clinton, and George W. Bush."

# data[].attributes.body
A common thread I found while reading is the importance of the Civil Rights Movement to exceptional learners gaining rights to a free and appropriate education. The Civil Rights Movement not only helped people of color have equal opportunities in education but also helped all marginalized people.

# data[].attributes.body
A Free and Appropriate Public Education.

This was determined during the EHA Act of 1975.

It addressed the need for education to be free and appropriate.

Appropriate means that it must meet the needs of the learner. This definition ensures that students are not neglected in the education system; rather, we meet the learners where they are.

# data[].attributes.body
According to this article, this ". . . law was passed to meet four huge goals:

1. To ensure that special education services are available to children who need them

2. To guarantee that decisions about services to students with disabilities are fair and appropriate

3. To establish specific management and auditing requirements for special education

4. To provide federal funds to help the states educate students with disabilities"

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The Education for All Handicapped Children Act (sometimes referred to using the acronyms EAHCA or EHA, or Public Law (PL) 94-142) was enacted by the United States Congress in 1975. This act required all public schools accepting federal funds to provide equal access to education for children with physical and mental disabilities. Public schools were required to evaluate children with disabilities and create an educational plan with parent input that would emulate as closely as possible the educational experience of non-disabled students. The act was an amendment to Part B of the Education of the Handicapped Act enacted in 1966.

The act also required that school districts provide administrative procedures so that parents of disabled children could dispute decisions made about their children's education. Once the administrative efforts were exhausted, parents were then authorized to seek judicial review of the administration's decision. Prior to the enactment of EHA, parents could take their disputes straight to the judiciary under the Rehabilitation Act of 1973. The mandatory system of dispute resolution created by EHA was an effort to alleviate the financial burden created by litigation pursuant to the Rehabilitation Act.

PL 94-142 also contains a provision that disabled students should be placed in the least restrictive environment-one that allows the maximum possible opportunity to interact with non-impaired students. Separate schooling may only occur when the nature or severity of the disability is such that instructional goals cannot be achieved in the regular classroom. Finally, the law contains a due process clause that guarantees an impartial hearing to resolve conflicts between the parents of disabled children to the school system.

The law was passed to meet four huge goals:

1. To ensure that special education services are available to children who need them

2. To guarantee that decisions about services to students with disabilities are fair and appropriate

3. To establish specific management and auditing requirements for special education

4. To provide federal funds to help the states educate students with disabilities

EHA was revised and renamed as Individuals with Disabilities Education Act in 1990 for improvement of special education and inclusive education.

This summary is from Wikipedia.

The summary below was written by the Congressional Research Service, which is a nonpartisan division of the Library of Congress.

11/14/1975--Conference report filed in Senate. (Conference report filed in Senate, S. Rept. 94-455) Education for All Handicapped Children Act - Extends the provisions of the Education of the Handicapped Act through fiscal year 1977 and authorizes appropriations for such years. States the findings of the Congress, including that: (1) the special educational needs of handicapped children are not being fully met; (2) one million of the handicapped children in the United States are excluded entirely from the public school system and will not go through the educational process with their peers; and (3) it is in the national interest that the Federal Government assist State and local efforts to provide programs to meet the educational needs of handicapped children in order to assure equal protection of the laws. Describes the purposes of this Act, including to insure that all handicapped children have available to them special education and related services designed to meet their unique needs. Defines the terms used in this Act. States that the maximum amount of the grant to which a State is entitled under such Act shall equal the number of handicapped children aged three to twenty-one, who are receiving special education in such State, multiplied by a percentage of the average per pupil expenditure in public elementary and secondary schools in the United States. Increases such percentage from 5 to 40 percent by 1982. Requires States to distribute portions of such grants to local education agencies and intermediate educational units, to spend for administration, and to match Federal grants for specified expenditures for support services and direct services. Sets forth provisions relating to extension of grants to Territories and to Indian children. Sets forth requirements for eligibility including the following which a State must demonstrate to the Commissioner: (1) the State has in effect a policy that assures all handicapped children the right to a free appropriate public education; and (2) the State has developed a plan which requires it to assure that a free appropriate public education will be available for all handicapped children between the ages of three and eighteen within the State not later than September 1, 1978, and for all handicapped children between the ages of three and twenty-four within the State not later than September 1, 1980; and (3) each local educational agency in the State will maintain records of the individualized education program for each handicapped child and such program shall be established, reviewed, and revised. Requires applications for assistance under this Act to: (1) set forth a description of programs and procedures for the development and implementation of a comprehensive system of personnel development which shall include the in-service training of general and special educational instructional and support personnel; (2) set forth policies and procedures to assure that to the extent consistent with the number and location of handicapped children in the State who are enrolled in private elementary and secondary schools, provision is made for the participation of such children in the program assisted or carried out under this part by providing for such children special education and related services; (3) provide satisfaction assurance that Federal funds made available will not be commingled with State funds, and will be so used as to supplement and increase the level of State and local funds expended for the education of handicapped children and not to supplant such State and local funds; and (4) provide that the State has an advisory panel, appointed by the Governor or any other official authorized under State law to make such appointments, composed of individuals involved in or concerned with the education of handicapped children, including handicapped individuals, teachers, parents or guardians of handicapped children, State and local education officials, and administrators of programs for handicapped children. States that a local educational agency or an intermediate educational unit which desires to receive payments under this Act shall submit an application to the appropriate State educational agency, and such application shall: (1) provide satisfactory assurance that payments under this part will be used for excess costs directly attributable to programs which provide that all children residing within the jurisdiction of the local educational agency or the intermediate educational unit who are handicapped, regardless of the severity of their handicap, and are in need of special education and related services will be identified, located, and evaluated; and (2) provide assurances that the local educational agency or intermediate educational unit will establish, or revise, whichever is appropriate, an individualized education program of each handicapped child at the beginning of each school year and will then review and, if appropriate revise, its provisions periodically, but not less than annually. Provides that whenever a State educational agency finds that a local educational agency or an intermediate educational unit, in the administration of an application approved by the State educational agency, has failed to comply with any requirement set forth in such application, the State educational agency, after giving appropriate notice to the local educational agency or the intermediate educational unit, shall make no further payments to such local educational agency or such intermediate educational unit until the State educational agency is satisfied that there is no longer any failure to comply with the requirement involved. States that whenever a State educational agency determines that a local educational agency is unable or unwilling to establish and maintain programs of free appropriate public education; is unable or unwilling to be consolidated with other local educational agencies in order to establish and maintain such programs; or has one or more handicapped children who can best be served by a regional or State center designed to meet the needs of such children; the State educational agency shall use the payments which would have been available to such local educational agency to provide special education and related services directly to handicapped children residing in the area by such local educational agency. Requires any State educational agency, any local educational agency, and any intermediate educational unit which receives assistance under this part to establish and maintain procedures to assure that handicapped children and their parents or guardians are guaranteed procedural safeguards with respect to the provision of free appropriate public education by such agencies and units, which procedures shall include, but shall not be limited to, an opportunity for the parents or guardian of a handicapped child to examine all relevant records with respect to the identification, evaluation, and educational placement of the child. Provides that whenever a complaint has been received under this Act the parents or guardian shall have an opportunity for an impartial due process hearing, and a right of appeal therefrom to State or Federal court. Provides that whenever the Commissioner, after reasonable notice and opportunity for hearing to the State educational agency involved, finds that there has been a failure to comply substantially with specified provisions of this Act, or that in the administration of the State plan there is a failure to comply or with any requirements set forth in the application of a local educational agency or intermediate educational unit the Commissioner of Education shall, after notifying the State educational agency, withhold any further payments to the State under this Act. Permits an appeal to United States circuit court of appeals from any such action by the Commissioner. Directs the Commissioner to conduct, directly or by grant or contract, such studies, investigations, and evaluations as are necessary to assure effective implementation of this Act, and through the National Center for Education Statistics, to provide to the appropriate committees of each House of the Congress and to the general public at least annually, programmatic information concerning programs and projects assisted under this Act and other Federal programs supporting the education of handicapped children. Requires that, not later than 120 days after the close of each fiscal year, the Commissioner shall transmit to the appropriate committees of each House of the Congress a report on the progress being made toward the provisions of free appropriate public education to all handicapped children, including a detailed description of all evaluation activities conducted. Authorizes grants to States which have met the eligibility requirements of this Act and have an approved State plan, to be used for the provision of special education and related services to the handicapped aged three to five. Sets a maximum for such grants of $300 per child. Sets forth provisions relating to the procedures of payments under this Act to State education agencies, and to local and intermediate educational agencies. Requires any proposed changes in the definition of "children with specific learning disabilities" to be submitted to the Congress. Defines such term presently to mean those children who have a disorder in one or more of the basic psychological processes involved in understanding or in using language, spoken or written, which disorder may manifest itself in imperfect ability to listen, think, speak, read, write, spell, or do mathematical calculations. Directs the Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare to assure that each recipient of assistance under this Act shall make positive efforts to employ and advance in employment qualified handicapped individuals in programs assisted under this Act. Authorizes, upon application by any State or local educational agency or intermediate educational unit, the Commissioner to make grants to pay part or all of the cost of altering existing buildings and equipment to remove architectural barriers. Authorizes the Secretary to enter into agreements with institutions of higher education, State and local educational agencies, or other appropriate nonprofit agencies, for the establishment and operation of centers on educational media and materials for the handicapped.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
S. 6 (94th): Education For All Handicapped Children Act

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The Education for All Handicapped Children Act (sometimes referred to using the acronyms EAHCA or EHA, or Public Law (PL) 94-142) was enacted by the United States Congress in 1975. This act required all public schools accepting federal funds to provide equal access to education for children with physical and mental disabilities.

# data[].attributes.body
Least Restrictive Environment

Students should be placed in the least restrictive environment. That means that exceptional learners should be placed in the general education environment with their non-disabled peers.

# data[].attributes.headline
The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act

# data[].attributes.subject
The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act

# data[].attributes.body
EHA's name was changed in 1990. It also updated many key features of the law to address current problems. One of the key problems teachers faced was helping older students with disabilities. In 1990, having a transition plan became part of an IEP at age sixteen. This was to help students leaving school prepare for life. Including this in the law was important. It should be our primary goal as educators to ensure our students succeed outside of school.

# data[].attributes.body
The article above states that, "It took many decades and the force of civil rights legislation and court decisions before universal access to public education matured into the full pursuit of equal educational opportunity for all racial, ethnic, religious, and linguistic groups, as well as for girls and children with disabilities."

# data[].attributes.body
1986

Since the EHA was the first of it's kind in our country, there was pruning that needed to happen in the following years. For example, in 1986 we had to address the need for early intervention.

# data[].attributes.body
The first amendment to IDEA focused on making general educators part of the IEP team.

General educators are one of the most significant contributors to an IEP as they spend countless hours with their students. They have great insight into the student's academic abilities.

# data[].attributes.body
RTI

Response to Intervention

A multiple-tiered system that helps teachers track and use student data. Schools are required to use RTI for targeted support. This targeted support is either to help push students or identify struggling students that may need more supports.

# data[].attributes.body
Individual Education Plan

Designed to meet the needs of exceptional learners. Education is not appropriate if it does not meet a student's needs. An IEP ensures students have goals and meet those goals!

# data[].attributes.body
George Washington University, C. on E. P. (CEP), Kober, N., & Rentner, D. S. (2020). History and Evolution of Public Education in the US. In Center on Education Policy.

GovTrack.us. (n.d.). S. 6 — 94th Congress: Education for All Handicapped Children Act. Retrieved June 20, 2024, from https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/94/s6/summary

Murphy, J. W. (n.d.). Introduction to the study of law (Chapter 1). SAGE Publications. Retrieved June 20, 2024, from https://us.sagepub.com/sites/default/files/upm-binaries/40754_mur_ch1.pdf

Public Interest Law Center. (n.d.). Pennsylvania Association for Retarded Citizens (PARC) v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. Public Interest Law Center. Retrieved June 20, 2024, from https://pubintlaw.org/cases-and-projects/pennsylvania-association-for-retarded-citizens-parc-v-commonwealth-of-pennsylvania/

Teachings in Education. (2016, October 10). Special education law [Video]. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dj2dBLi7zvQ

Teachings in Education. (2022, August 29). Education for All Handicapped Children Act PL 94 142 [Video]. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G4Xzvafi-Pg

U.S. Department of Education. (2024, February 16). A history of the individuals with disabilities education act. Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. https://sites.ed.gov/idea/IDEA-History