A Six Part Series
Part 1: FAPE
The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) is a federal law that establishes important rules and guidelines for special education. It's designed to ensure that children with disabilities have access to the specialized instruction, individualized services, and support they require to thrive in the public education system. In this upcoming blog series, we'll break down the main tenets of IDEA in a way that's easy to understand for parents and individuals who may not be education professionals.
This series will discuss the six key principles of IDEA: 1) Free Appropriate Public Education (FAPE), 2) Appropriate Evaluations, 3) Individualized Education Programs (IEPs), 4) Least Restrictive Environment (LRE), 5) Parent and student participation in decision-making, and 6) Procedural Safeguards. Our aim is to provide clear insights into what these principles mean for you, and how they are (or should be) applied in practice.
In this post, we are going to focus on FAPE - what it means, what it does not mean, and how to use it to advocate for your child.
Free Appropriate Public Education (FAPE)
Navigating the concept of Free Appropriate Public Education (FAPE) in IDEA can sometimes feel like deciphering a complex puzzle. The term 'appropriate' can be a bit elusive in its interpretation. In this post, we'll not only look into what FAPE entails but also break it down into its fundamental components. By dissecting each aspect of FAPE, we aim to empower parents with the knowledge they need to effectively utilize FAPE's guidelines as a tool for advocating on behalf of their children's educational needs.
Free: The “F” in FAPE is refreshingly straightforward. Under this principle, a student with a disability is entitled to receive a public education at no cost to their parents or caregivers. This means that, apart from the typical expenses that all students incur, there should be no additional financial burden placed upon families seeking to ensure their child's access to education. In essence, FAPE guarantees that the right to a free public education is extended to every child, regardless of their disability, allowing families to focus solely on their child's learning and development without financial concerns.
Appropriate: Now, let's tackle the 'A' in FAPE, which stands for “appropriate.” This aspect can be a bit tricky, as the IDEA doesn't provide a clear-cut definition of what constitutes an “appropriate” education. Instead, it leaves this term open to interpretation, often relying on case law and decisions made by Local Education Agencies (LEAs) on a case-by-case basis.
Before a significant turning point in 2017, the standards for what was considered an “appropriate education” were, frankly, quite low. In essence, if a child made even the slightest bit of progress, regardless of how minor, they were considered to be meeting the “de minimis” standard, which is Latin for “too trivial or minor to consider,” and this was deemed acceptable. In other words, bare minimum progress for kids with disabilities was the norm. However, that changed on March 22, 2017, when the Supreme Court made a landmark decision in the case of Endrew F. vs. Douglas County. In this unanimous ruling, the Court rejected the “merely more than de minimis” standard and raised the bar for what qualifies as “appropriate progress” under FAPE.
In writing the Endrew results, Chief Justice John Roberts wrote:
When all is said and done, a student offered an educational program providing ‘merely more than de minimis’ progress from year to year can hardly be said to have been offered an education at all. For children with disabilities, receiving instruction that aims so low would be tantamount to ‘sitting idly…awaiting the time they were old enough to drop out. The IDEA demands more. It requires an educational program reasonably calculated to enable a child to make progress appropriate in light of the child’s circumstances.
While the Endrew decision was a significant step forward in setting standards for what constitutes an “appropriate education” for students with disabilities, it still leaves too much room for interpretation and subjectivity. The Court made it clear that voting against “de minimis” progress is a general standard and not a strict formula. Decisions regarding “appropriate” education must continue to be made on an individual case-by-case basis, considering that IEPs are designed to be individualized.
The Endrew decision established the precedent that “appropriate” no longer means merely exceeding the bare minimum progress. Instead, it signifies that children with disabilities are entitled to make “meaningful progress” in their educational journeys. However, there remains a gray area, as the Court did not overturn the Board of Education of the Hendrick Hudson Central School District v. Rowley case of 1982. In this earlier ruling, the courts emphasized that FAPE does not equate to providing the “best” education, nor does it require states to write IEPs that “maximize the potential of handicapped children.”
So, we find ourselves in a situation where “appropriate” education falls somewhere between “meaningfully” above the minimum and “below the best or maximum potential.” It's a balancing act that may not provide a direct answer but emphasizes the importance of personalized education plans tailored to each child's unique needs.
Public: When we talk about “public” in FAPE, we are referring to the public school system. Here, the key principle is that children with disabilities have the right to attend their local public school, just like their non-disabled peers, regardless of the nature or severity of their disability. Public schools are obligated to meet the unique needs of students with disabilities through the creation and implementation of Individualized Education Programs (IEPs).
However, it's essential to understand that the concept of FAPE does not translate to the same obligations when a student is enrolled in a private school by their parents. In these situations, the responsibilities of the LEA differ. While LEAs still have a duty to identify students with disabilities in private schools through Childfind obligations and offer FAPE within their district, they are not obligated to cover the costs or ensure FAPE in a privately chosen institution. Instead, LEAs are required to consult with private school representatives regarding parentally placed children with disabilities during the design and development of special education and related services. However, these children are not protected by IDEA to the same extent as they would be if attending their local public school. The situation changes if a student is referred to a private setting by the school or if it's determined that a private school provides the least restrictive environment (LRE).
Education: Within FAPE, the term “education” ensures that eligible children receive an educational experience tailored to their individual needs, as outlined in their IEPs. This includes specialized instruction and related services designed to address their specific requirements. As per the language of IDEA, the objective of this education extends beyond the classroom. It aims to prepare students for a well-rounded future, encompassing “further education, successful employment, and the ability to lead independent lives."
Using What We Know to Advocate
Empowering yourself with a clear understanding of FAPE can be a game-changer when advocating for your child with disabilities. Amidst the ambiguity surrounding the term “appropriate,” parents should shift their focus from debating what is or isn't appropriate to other aspects of the law that are objectively defined. By leveraging these elements within FAPE, we can design IEPs that not only set the stage for our children's success but also ensure that the LEA upholds the standards for a quality education, even if “quality” is not explicitly mandated by the law.
A critical cornerstone of FAPE is the IEP, which mandates that schools provide a comprehensive plan for each student. This plan includes a statement of the student's present levels of academic and functional performance (PLAAFP), measurable annual goals aimed at addressing deficiencies and facilitating progress, and details about the special education supports, aids, and related services that will be provided, among other things.
Starting with the PLAAFP section, it's imperative that parents ensure their child's present levels encompass accurate academic and functional needs, including how their disability impacts their performance across various areas, including academics, social skills, and functional abilities. Present levels should comprehensively cover all areas under evaluation and provide insight into how the child's performance compares to their grade-level peers, complete with relevant test scores and percentiles where applicable. The accuracy of the PLAAFP is pivotal as it forms the foundation for setting measurable annual goals that directly align with the child's present levels, fostering improvement in relevant academic and functional domains.
While crafting SMART (Specific, Measurable, Actively phrased, Realistic, Time-limited) IEP goals is best practice, IDEA primarily requires that goals be measurable and tailored to meet the child's disability-related needs. As you review proposed goals, pay close attention to their objectivity – goals should be quantifiable, either measured by norm-referenced sources or actionable behaviors, rather than relying solely on subjective observations or teacher-made rubrics, which can vary from one setting to another.
Lastly, within the IEP, there lies a crucial section specifying the special education and related services that will be provided to ensure FAPE access. These services, aids, accommodations, and modifications play a pivotal role in helping students thrive within the general education classroom or the determined Least Restrictive Environment (LRE). As valued members of the IEP team, parents should confidently contribute suggestions for services and accommodations they believe will level the playing field for their children, promoting success in their educational journey.
In Closing…
It's clear that while we may not have an exact definition for “appropriate,” we have valuable insights into its requirements. One of these crucial elements entails the development of IEP goals that chart a path towards meaningful progress, addressing the deficits identified in a student's present levels.
By arming ourselves with a deeper understanding of FAPE's principles and IEP components, we empower ourselves to advocate effectively for our children with disabilities. Instead of getting caught in debates over the elusive concept of ”appropriateness,” we can shift our focus to the components that we can use to pave the way for our children's success in their educational journeys.
Kommentare