Week 4: IEP and 504 Plans

1. List two new things you learned about the IEP meeting and/or process

 Parental engagement. Parents have the right to participate in all their child's IEP
meetings if they choose to. They are an equal and most important member in
developing an appropriate educational plan. If they cannot participate in person, they
have a right to participate via video or conference call.
 Specifics of setting goals. Each goal has four elements: a target behavior,
the conditions under which the target behavior will be exhibited and measured,
the criterion for acceptable performance, and the timeframe within which the student
will meet the criterion. To develop each element, the team members can ask guiding
questions that will help them narrow down the information that should be documented
in each goal. To help develop well-written, measurable goals, IEP teams may consider
using the acronym SMART. These characteristics, when applied to the four goal
elements above, can support IEP team members in the goal-development process.
a. Specific – clearly stated descriptions of each goal element: the conditions, the
academic or functional skill, the criterion for success, and the timeframe within
which the criterion should be met
b. Measurable – quantifiable by a defined standard that can be observed in some
way, particularly so that any amount of change can subsequently be identified
and/or evaluated
c. Actively phrased – Involving actions that are clearly observable (e.g., “Write a five-
sentence paragraph.”) rather than implied (e.g., “Improve your writing.”)
d. Realistic – Practical but ambitious and challenging and based on relevant
information (e.g., evaluation results, previous rates-of-growth, the student’s unique
circumstances, IEP team members’ professional judgment)
e. Time-limited – Involves a specified timeframe within which the skill is anticipated
to be mastered

2. In the videos what made the IEP meeting successful? what made it unsuccessful?

What made the IEP meeting successful? (Alex meeting)

 Clear agenda established

 Expected meeting time specified in the beginning
 Introductions were done, and done quickly
 Both teachers asked for student input – History teacher asked follow-up questions to
student for more clarity; Biology teacher asked for her perspective on the challenges she
has

What made the IEP meeting unsuccessful? (Alex meeting)

  No person took a lead in managing the meeting
 Turned the meeting over to Alex in the beginning – she was the only one who had input
 The parent didn’t seem prepared as he appeared confused and not clear at his
introduction
 Parent wasn’t asked to share about the child’s strengths, progress and any ongoing
concerns
 No specific goals – SMART – were defined
 Biology teacher immediately solved to her reading issue after the Alex’s input, case
person didn’t even share perspective on what the issues are and how to solve
 Nothing was written down except Alex’s own thoughts, and that was written in
advance

3. What are two things that an educator should do at an IEP meeting? What are two things an
educator should NOT do at an IEP meeting? Give a rational for your answer(s).

TWO things that an educator should do at an IEP meeting

I. DO prepare in advance – (1) ideally, meet with other IEP attendees in advance of the
meeting as well as reach out to the parents to make some contact; and (2) coordinate
the documents and information you want to share in advance
II. DO think about what you are going to say and be positive. When first speaking in the
meeting, start off positively by identifying a positive strength or strengths the student
possesses. The meeting can be tense for the parents, and those kinds of comments
help facilitate the conversation immensely.

TWO things an educator should NOT do at an IEP meeting

I. DO NOT ignore the parents nor their input - it is important that parents are provided
a full opportunity to express their views & participate fully in the IEP meeting; the
parents should be involved in the development of the IEP.
II. DO NOT share or disclose status of other students without obtaining the required
parental consent of the other students. Disclosing this information without approval
would be a violation of the Family Education Rights & Privacy Act (FERPA).

4. As a general education teacher what can you do at an IEP meeting that you attend (for the
families, student, special education teacher?

FOR THE FAMILIES

 Ask if the parents have any questions first. Parents may have a burning question
that should be addressed before they can focus on the meeting.
 Make sure everyone at the IEP meeting is introduced as well as their job function
is shared.
 Make sure the agenda is shared before starting, and provide details on how the
meeting will flow
  Provide an update on student progress; if there is already an IEP in place, review the
current goals and talk about progress. If the first meeting, identify a positive strength or
strengths the student possesses to help frame the discussion.
 Be prepared –in what your role is, in what you are going to say, and to have supporting
documentation as needed
 Give the parents a call before the meeting, regardless of purpose. It will help warm up
the meeting to not come in blind
 In the meeting, make sure you thank the parents for their continued support
 After each section of the meeting, ask parents, “what questions/concerns do you
have?”
 Make sure you are listening to what the parent is saying and validate their
concerns.
 Send a recap email right after the meeting.
 A day after the meeting, give the parents another call. Check in, show you care.
See if they have any additional questions and let them know that you truly are
there for them and their child.

FOR THE STUDENT

 In advance of the meeting, ask yourself if you have done everything you can to help the
student succeed?
 Engage the student in the educational process and IEP
 Share relevant information about the student’s progress academically and socially
 Share what you have observed are the student’s strengths and needs
 Share any accommodations and/or modifications that appears to be working in your
classroom
 When talking about a student’s performance, always start with a positive
 Work to inspire others on the team to create a plan that really works for the student

FOR THE SEPECIAL ED TEACHER

 Be a team player – meet with the Special Ed teacher in advance to discuss strategies and
help drive a plan to meet the student’s individualized needs; prep the team in advance
to ensure a great meeting
 Bring the learning goals and plans, and when it is your turn, share your vision for how to
help the student strive to reach those goals
 Bring some solid strategies and suggestions

the pre-referral process, a preventative measure that can help to eliminate inappropriate referrals
to special education. He explains that pre-referral supports general education teachers when
they have students who exhibit academic or behavioral problems. Mr. Young further describes
the pre-referral process as a:
Pre-referral uses a problem-solving team to help teachers find effective teaching
strategies for use with students who exhibit academic or behavioral difficulties. Of
course, the mere fact that a student displays such behavior does not necessarily mean
that the student requires special education services. In some cases, supports for
students can be put in place to improve their performance and subsequently prevent
inappropriate referrals to special education. During those cases in which a
referral is warranted, the pre-referral team contributes data to support later assessment
and identification efforts. Besides helping to avoid inappropriate referrals, the pre-
referral process boasts a number of benefits, among them that it:

 Provides a forum for teachers and other team members—including parents—to

discuss how to meet students’ needs
 Empowers general education teachers with a variety of strategies to better serve
diverse learners
 Prevents the overrepresentation of students from a particular group (e.g., English
learners, students at risk due to poor teaching) in special education
 Improves communication between parents and the school by involving families in
the process (e.g., parents offer information, participate in intervention development,
become members of the team)
  the pre-referral process itself can typically be divided into six distinct stages:

THE PRE-REFERRAL PROCESS

The pre-referral process is a team-based, largely preventative approach used by schools to

assist classroom teachers in implementing interventions among students with academic or
behavioral problems. It is not intended as a step toward the placement of students into special
education, though for some students the pre-referral process may indeed lead to a formal
referral for special education services.

Stage 1: Initial concern regarding a student’s progress. The first stage in the pre-referral
process, initial concern, begins when someone—a teacher, parent, or member of the school
staff—starts to have concerns about a student’s academic or behavioral performance. This
concern may be expressed either informally or formally; however, once the pre-referral process
has been initiated in a given school, it should be managed consistently, regardless of the
manner in which the original concern was communicated.

Stage 2: Information gathering can be accomplished in a number of ways and carried out by a
variety of different personnel. For example, in some cases, the referring teacher might collect
the information. In others, the school counselor or a member of the pre-referral team might
assist in gathering information to present to the rest of the group. Regardless of who collects it,
it is important to collect information about:

 Instructional methods, strategies, and materials that have been previously tried or used
 The student’s skill level
 The student’s background knowledge and experiences
 School and home expectations for behavior and academic performance
 Classroom behavior management techniques

 
Informal assessments are an especially important tool for gathering these types of information.
Such assessments can help the pre-referral team to understand the nature, extent, and severity
of the student’s difficulties. For example, if a student is having difficulty with math, the teacher
can assess or estimate his or her ability level in various skills (e.g., math facts, computation,
word problems). Besides informal assessments, teachers can use a variety of sources to collect
information:

 Family members
 Other classroom teachers
 Student portfolios or work samples
 Classroom observations
 Cumulative school records
 Attendance records
 Formal assessments

Stage 3: Information sharing and team discussion. The team meets to begin its review of the
information collected to date and to start discussing ideas and interventions—including type
and intensity—that may help the student.

Typically, pre-referral teams are composed of a diverse set of individuals (e.g., general
education teacher, school counselor, reading specialist) who have experience using and
designing instructional techniques to address the needs of students. To establish a collegial
atmosphere, team members share information in an effort to promote student success in
general education classrooms. The number of people on the team varies depending on the
needs of the student being referred; however, each person on the team should have a
contributing role.

Stage 4: Discussion of possible strategies. During this part of the meeting, the members
brainstorm strategies that they believe are most likely to meet the needs of the student. One or
more strategies may be selected for each area of concern. For example, if the pre-referral team
is meeting to discuss a concern about a student’s difficulty in remaining seated during class
work, they may generate ideas about how to implement self-regulation strategies.
Some schools might find it advantageous to have established procedures in place to guide the
implementation of strategies. Research has shown that teachers implement practices better
when they are both supported and monitored by school personnel (generally, administrators).
Whatever intervention they end up selecting, the team must specify its duration. In many cases
pre-referral interventions are implemented for a period of four to six weeks. However, duration
might be influenced by the type, intensity, or frequency of the identified concern. For instance,
the team might decide to convene sooner to review the plan for a student who is displaying
severe and frequent disruptive behaviors.

Along with interventions, the pre-referral team may identify appropriate accommodations to
address the specific needs of the student in the general education classroom. Such
accommodations might entail recommendations for the:

 Classroom environment (e.g., changing seating positions, making the classroom

more accessible)
 Classroom management system (e.g., increasing positive reinforcement, providing
individual student contracts)
 Instructional procedures (e.g., providing additional instruction, presenting content in
a different format, grouping students)
 Task demands (e.g., assigning only the odd-numbered math problems, instead of all
of them)

Stage 5: Implementation and monitoring of strategies. The plan is implemented, and the
student’s progress is monitored. Implementation and monitoring are often the responsibility of
a classroom teacher, though others on the team may serve as support. Data is collected during
this stage and will be used to help the team determine the effectiveness of the intervention.
Many teachers have found that one relatively fast, easy, and effective means of monitoring
academic progress is through the use of curriculum based measurement (CBM). For monitoring
student behavior, the teacher can use checklists or a behavior recording sheet.

Stage 6: Evaluation and decision making.  the pre-referral team reconvenes to review the
collected data and to determine whether the student has made progress. If yes, the team
decides whether the teacher needs to continue the intervention. If no, the team determines
whether the strategy should be continued or modified, whether a new strategy should be tried,
or whether the student should be referred for special education. As they review the information
and come to a decision about the student’s progress, the team should consider several
questions noted in the table below.

Is the student making adequate progress in the classroom?

 YES NO

If the student is making adequate If the student is not making adequate

progress, ask: progress, ask:

Can the intervention or accommodation be Does the strategy need to be modified or

discontinued, or does the student require continued, or are there any other
sustained intervention to succeed in the strategies that we can try?
general education classroom?

Is offering the student sustained supports Should the team initiate the formal referral
a practical option for those carrying out the process for special education?
plan?

 
Regardless of the pre-referral stage, it is always important for the team to include the student’s
parent(s) or guardian(s) in the process. Though their consent is not required to hold these
meetings, the team should encourage parents’ participation and keep them informed and
involved. The observations and perspectives of parents or guardians often offer valuable
insights about a student and allow the team to gauge his or her progress across environments

Assessment

Take some time now to answer the following questions. Please note that the IRIS Center does
not collect your Assessment responses. If this is a course assignment, you should turn them in
to your professor using whatever method he or she requires. If you have trouble answering any
of the questions, go back and review the Perspectives & Resources pages in this module.

1. Describe three benefits of the pre-referral process.

2. List the six stages of the pre-referral process and briefly explain each of them.
3. Why is it important to begin the initial team meeting with a discussion of the student’s
strengths?

For questions 4–5, recall Walker’s case from the “What About Walker?” activity on Perspectives &
Resources Page 4. Walker had a bike accident that left him with a minor concussion. After his return
to school, his teacher noticed that Walker:

 Had difficulty comprehending and remembering information he had read

 Was failing weekly quizzes and tests
 Appeared to have decreased motivation
 Exhibited difficulty attending to and completing his work
The teacher spoke to Walker’s mom, who indicated that since the accident Walker had been moody
and agitated. As a result of her growing concerns, the teacher determined that Walker was an
appropriate candidate for the pre-referral process.

4. In Walker’s case, what role might the general education teacher play at each stage of the
pre-referral process?
5. List the other individuals that you would include on Walker’s pre-referral team and
describe the roles they would fill.
6. Imagine you are a fourth-grade teacher, and you have a student named Kevon in your
class. Kevon has a good attitude, is cooperative in class, and is helpful to his classmates. He
is always eager to start his assignments and wants to please. You note that he has strong
critical thinking skills and gets along well with others. However, you are concerned because
he reads slowly, so slowly in fact that he has difficulty comprehending the material in his
textbooks. He often guesses at words he does not recognize, and he seems to become
easily frustrated with his reading assignments. Reviewing his cumulative file, you see that
his grades have steadily declined since first grade. Based on all of this information, do you
think Kevon is an appropriate candidate for the pre-referral process? Justify your answer.

IEPS: Developing High-Quality Individualized Education Programs

This module details the process of developing high-quality individualized education programs (IEPs) for
students with disabilities. The module discusses the requirements for IEPs as outlined in the Individuals
with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) with implications of the Supreme Court's ruling in Endrew F. v.
Douglas County School District (est. completion time: 3 hours).

Note: The content addressed in this module is based on federal law and regulations. State and local
education agencies may have additional requirements. The information in this module is not intended to
be a replacement for careful study of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act and its implementing
regulations.

transcript: Challenge

Mr. Anaya is a first-year special education teacher at Washington County Elementary School. The
assistant principal, Mrs. Pederson, has just emailed him about an upcoming IEP meeting for Sienna, a
4th-grade student whose initial evaluation was just completed. This will be Mr. Anaya’s first IEP team
meeting. He learned a lot about IEPs in college and had lots of practice writing the various components
as part of his course assignments. He even attended several IEP meetings during his student-teaching
semester. But now he’s going to be involved in the process for real and is a bit nervous. If the IEP team
determines that Sienna is eligible for special education services, Mr. Anaya wants to make sure that she
has a high-quality IEP that is geared to address her individual needs. He also wants to be sure her IEP
contains challenging and meaningful learning goals that will guide his instruction.

To prepare for the IEP meeting, Mr. Anaya talks to Mrs. Pederson.

Mr. Anaya: I noticed the meeting is only scheduled for 45 minutes. I’m wondering how we’re going to
get everything done in such a short timeframe.

Mrs. Pederson: Don’t worry. There’s plenty of time. Mrs. Esposito has already started pulling Sienna’s
learning goals into her IEP. She’s using a computerized program.

Mr. Anaya: Really? You can do that?

Mrs. Pederson: Oh, yeah! It’s got a bank of pre-developed items to select from. It’s super easy to use.
The IEP’s practically done. We just have to share it with the parents and have them sign it.

Mr. Anaya: But if I’m the one going to the IEP meeting, why is Mrs. Esposito working on the IEP?

Mrs. Pederson: Well, Mrs. Esposito has an available slot in her classroom, so she will probably be
Sienna’s teacher. I asked you to attend because she’s not available at that time. As long as we
have a special education teacher at the meeting, it really doesn’t matter who it is. Anyway, Mrs. Dubois
—you’ve met her, right?—she’s Sienna’s 4th-grade teacher. Well, she can only be there for 20 minutes
while her class is at recess. I think it’ll be a quick meeting.

Mr. Anaya is now more nervous than ever. The process at Washington County Elementary is quite
different from what he learned about in college, and it is nothing like what he experienced during
student teaching. He wonders whether he should just sit quietly during this meeting and then take a
more active role in future meetings, once he has learned how Washington County Elementary does
things.

Here is your Challenge:

 What is an IEP?
 What is the IEP process?
 What is included in the IEP document?

Perspectives & Resources

Objectives

By completing the entire Perspectives & Resources section and reviewing the accompanying activities,
you should be able to:

 Identify the purpose and components of a high-quality IEP

 Understand key procedural and substantive requirements of a high-quality IEP
 Recognize the most common procedural and substantive errors made by IEP teams
 Describe how a high-quality IEP is developed around the unique needs of each student
  Identify the elements of a high-quality PLAAFP statement
 Explain how to develop challenging, ambitious, and measurable goals
 Identify the elements that should be included in a statement of the individualized services
and supports to be provided to a student
 Explain the importance of documenting a student’s progress toward meeting his or her IEP
goals and reporting that progress to parents

Overview of High Quality IEPs

Public school classrooms today are made up of diverse students with a wide variety of strengths and
challenges. Among these students, of course, are those with disabilities. In 2016, approximately 13
percent of all public-school students—more than 6 million—had disabilities that affected their learning.
These students qualify for special education—individualized services and supports tailored to address
their unique learning needs.

It is important to keep in mind, however, that receiving special education services does not mean that
students with disabilities will spend their school day entirely in separate special education classrooms. In
fact, quite the contrary. Of the 6.8 million students cited above, 92% spent at least some portion of the
day in general education classrooms being taught by general education teachers, though often with the
support of professionals that include special educators and related service providers.

In the sections below, we’ll overview the process of determining which students qualify for special
education services, and how this qualification process initiates the creation of an individualized
education program  (IEP). An IEP is a written plan, developed collaboratively by school personnel and a
student’s parents, which outlines the student’s current level of development, her annual educational
goals, special education services, accommodations, modifications, and related services, as well as a
method for monitoring and reporting the student’s progress toward achieving her goals.

Transcript: Larry Wexler, EdD

I meet with every international delegation that comes to the U.S. Department of Education and wants to
talk about kids with disabilities. And whether they’re from Uzbekistan or Argentina or Nepal or Lebanon,
whenever we talk about the IEP they are completely astonished that there is such a thing as an
individualized educational program for every kid with a disability. And they really appreciate the fact
that the IEP is about specialized instruction and supports for specialized instruction. And yes it is
required under the law, but the point of it is that every child is unique. It is an individualized program
and every child needs unique supports and instructional practices.

It’s especially important for the general education teachers to be aware of the IEP because that child has
some unique needs. And yes, the child has been integrated into a general education classroom, but that
does not necessarily mean his needs or her needs are being met just by being exposed to the regular
instruction. The needs are only met if the requirements of the IEP—the instructional accommodations,
the instructional approaches—are in fact implemented not just by the special education teacher, but
also by the general education teacher.

Page 2: Endrew F. & IEP Standards

As we mentioned on the previous page, the IEP process is described in legislation (law) but clarified
through litigation (lawsuits). That is, legislation tells educators what they must do, whereas litigation
rulings help them to more specifically understand how and to what extent they must do it. The IEP
process is also guided through regulations, rules issued by the U.S. Department of Education to clarify
the legislation and to ensure uniform application of the law.

In 2017, a case before the U.S. Supreme Court, Endrew F. v. Douglas County School District  (hereafter
referred to as Endrew), sought to bring clarity to the IEP process by answering the following question:
What is the level of educational benefit school districts must confer on children with disabilities to
provide them with a free appropriate public education (FAPE) guaranteed by the Individuals with
Disabilities Education Act (IDEA)?

In the sections below, we will overview this landmark case and ruling and then begin to describe what it
all means to the ways that educators create IEPs for students with disabilities.

Background: The focus of this case was Endrew (or Drew), a 5th-grade student with autism spectrum
disorder (ASD) and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). From kindergarten through 4th
grade, Drew attended public school in the Douglas County, Colorado, School District. Though IEPs were
developed for Drew during these years, his academic and functional progress appeared to have stalled.
In April 2010, Drew’s parents rejected the district’s proposed 5th-grade IEP, which they felt was basically
the same as Drew’s earlier IEPs and therefore would not help him to improve his learning outcomes.

Drew’s parents subsequently withdrew him from public school and enrolled him in a private school
specializing in the education of students with ASD. In this setting, Drew’s behavior improved
significantly, his academic goals were strengthened, and his educational outcomes improved.

For Your Information

de minimis: (Latin) too trivial or minor to consider

Prior to Endrew, six of the thirteen U.S. Court of Appeals Circuit Courts applied a very low substantive
standard when considering educational benefit: the “merely more than de minimis” standard. In legal
proceedings, the Latin term de minimis is used to describe something that is too trivial or minor to be
concerned about. (The term is a shortened version of the statement de minimis non curat lex or “The
law is not concerned with trivial matters.”)
In practical terms, what this means is that a student who made no educational progress whatsoever—
received no educational benefit—would not meet the de minimis standard. However, a student who
made anything more than no progress—even just a tiny amount of progress—would meet the
substantive standard. The Supreme Court’s ruling in Endrew created a higher substantive standard that
must now be used to determine educational benefit: An IEP must be “reasonably calculated to enable a
child to make progress appropriate in light of the child’s circumstances.”

Litigation: Following an unsuccessful attempt to receive reimbursement from Douglas County for the
private school tuition payments at a due process hearing, Drew’s parents took their case first to the U.S.
District Court for the District of Colorado and then to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit.
Both courts, however, rejected their argument, concluding that the Douglas County School District had
provided Drew with a FAPE because his IEPs were created to provide educational benefit that was
merely more than de minimis, a Latin term that means more than trivial or minor, a very low standard. In
response, Drew’s parents appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court.

Decision: In a unanimous ruling, the Supreme Court rejected the low educational benefit standard used
by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit. The Supreme Court ruled “To 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” (Endrew F. v. Douglas County School District,
2017, p. 15). The Supreme Court sent the case back to the Tenth Circuit to apply this higher educational
benefit standard. The district court judge subsequently held that the Douglas County School District had
failed to provide Drew with a FAPE. Eventually, the school district paid Drew’s parents $1.3 million for
his private school tuition, related expenses, and attorney’s fees.

The Endrew case delivered a landmark ruling that clarified the substantive standard for determining
whether a student’s IEP—the centerpiece of each child’s entitlement to FAPE under IDEA—is sufficient
to enable a student with a disability to make progress appropriate in light of his or her circumstances. As
such, it resulted in a monumental shift away from rote adherence to the administrative tasks of IEP
development, placing far greater emphasis on decision-making that considers the individualized needs
of students with disabilities. In short, the Endrew ruling provided a consistent standard regarding the
quality of the education, as laid out in their IEPs, to which students with disabilities are entitled.

PAGE 3 The IEP Process

Recall that the purpose of the procedural requirements is to make certain that the IEP process is
followed in order to develop high-quality IEPs. Before they begin this process, however, educators
should be familiar with some basic information about pre-referral practices and the guiding principles
behind IDEA.
Pre-Referral

When a child exhibits learning or behavior difficulties, teachers first try to determine whether systematic
changes to instruction or other aspects of the learning environment are sufficient to address them. This
is referred to as the pre-referral process, a team-based approach many schools use to help classroom
teachers implement interventions for students with academic or behavioral problems. For some
students, these minor changes are enough, and no further interventions are required. For others,
though, the pre-referral process leads to a formal referral to be evaluated for special education services.
(To learn more about the pre-referral process, see the link to the IRIS Module listed in the IEP Toolbox at
the bottom of this page.)

The Six Guiding Principles of IDEA

The guiding principles of IDEA provide overarching guarantees to students with disabilities and their
families that must be adhered to during the IEP process. There are six guiding principles, some of which
were introduced on earlier pages but are described in more detail below.

1. Complete, individualized evaluation: All areas of the suspected disability must be assessed,
including any specific parental concerns. The results of this assessment must be comprehensive
enough to identify all of the student’s relevant academic and functional needs in order to guide
future instructional decisions.
2. Free appropriate public education (FAPE): Each eligible student with a disability—one whose
disability adversely affects school performance—is entitled to FAPE that is individualized to meet his
or her unique needs and provided in conformity with that student’s IEP.
3. Individualized education program (IEP): An IEP is a written statement of the special education
services provided to meet the unique needs of a student with a disability between the ages of 3 and
21. The IEP, a blueprint of the student’s FAPE, is developed in collaboration with the student’s
parents.
4. Least restrictive environment  (LRE): FAPE is to be provided alongside peers without disabilities in
the general education settings to the greatest extent possible. Removal from the general education
setting should only occur in instances when the nature or severity of the disability is such that an
appropriate education cannot be satisfactorily achieved in that setting, even with the use of
supplementary aids and services.
5. Parent participation: The most basic of IDEA’s requirements is that parents are full and equal
participants with the school district personnel on their child’s IEP team—a group that includes a
variety of education professionals, the student’s parents, and the student, when appropriate.
6. Procedural safeguards: In addition to the right to active participation, parents have additional
rights that include:

o Giving informed written consent for their child to be evaluated, and to seek an
independent evaluation if they feel compelled to do so
o Access to their child’s educational records
 o Dispute resolution through steps that can include state complaint, mediation,
a resolution session, and/or a due process hearing
o Explanation of these rights in writing, and in their native language when possible

These guarantees are included in IDEA to ensure that each student with a disability receives the
individualized FAPE to which he or she is entitled. To satisfy the requirements of the law, these
provisions must be adhered to throughout the IEP process.

Page 4: Procedural Requirements: Guidelines & Common Errors

Legislation and Litigation 

[A]n IEP must be drafted in compliance with a detailed set of procedures (that) emphasize collaboration
among parents and educators and require careful consideration of the child’s individual circumstances.

Endrew F. v. Douglas County School District, 2017, p. 2

On the previous page, we introduced you to IDEA’s procedural requirements for providing special
education services and supports to students with disabilities. On this page, we will begin to offer more
specific guidance about how school personnel should actually implement these requirements in
practice. We’ll also point out some common procedural errors to avoid.

Procedural Requirement Guidelines

Although not an exhaustive list, the practices outlined below can support the development of a
technically sound IEP. School personnel who engage in these practices are also more likely to develop an
educationally meaningful high-quality IEP that meets the needs of students with disabilities.

 Involve parents in the IEP process

 Conduct a thorough, individualized evaluation
 Adhere to required timelines
 Ensure attendance at IEP meetings by all necessary team members
 Implement the special education services as written in the IEP

These procedural guidelines should not only be followed during the full IEP process that starts when a
student is initially referred for testing, but also when a student who is already receiving special
education services has an upcoming annual review. In the interviews below, two teachers share some
insights on the importance of positive parent engagement early in the annual review process.
Common Procedural Errors

There are a number of serious procedural errors that IEP teams should avoid. Of particular concern are
those that inhibit parental participation, compromise a student’s FAPE, or deprive the student of his or
her educational benefits. A few of the more common procedural errors are described below.

 Failure to involve parents in the IEP process

 Predetermining a student’s placement or services
 Determining placement before programming
 Failure to assemble an appropriate IEP team
 Failure to include required components in a student’s IEP

In many cases, procedural errors can be addressed or corrected by re-convening the IEP team. In other
situations, particularly those in which parents and school personnel disagree, either party can initiate
dispute-resolution procedures (i.e., state complaints, mediation, resolution session, due process
hearing). If the dispute advances to a due process hearing, an impartial hearing officer reviews the
available evidence and makes a ruling. Of primary consideration is the degree of harm caused to the
student’s special education program and her FAPE as a result of the procedural violation. More
specifically, IDEA specifies that hearing officers can only rule against a school if procedural violations
have resulted in one or more of the following:

 Impeded the student’s right to receive a FAPE

 Impeded the parents’ opportunity to participate in the educational decision-making process
 Caused a deprivation of educational benefits

PAGE 5: The IEP Content

Recall that the student’s IEP is the blueprint of her FAPE. It is intended to be a fluid document that lays
out the special education services and supports that will be delivered to the student, based on her
unique needs. As we mentioned in a previous section, IDEA stipulates that every student’s IEP must
contain certain specific components in order to meet procedural requirements. Let’s revisit each of
these components in more detail.

Component Content

Present levels of academic These statements summarize the student’s abilities in both
achievement and functional academic and/or functional skill areas and include how the
performance (PLAAFP) student’s disability affects her involvement in the general
education curriculum.

Challenging, ambitious, and These goals describe what the student is expected to
 measurable goals accomplish, in academics and/or functional skills, in a 12-
month period. The goals help IEP team personnel determine
whether the student is making educational gains and whether
the program is providing meaningful educational benefit.

Description of special This is a statement of all of the educational services to be

education and related services provided by the school in order to help the student meet her
and supplementary services annual goals. These services should be based on peer-
reviewed research to the greatest extent possible and be
provided in the LRE.

Method for measuring and This is a description of how the student’s progress toward the
reporting progress annual goals will be measured and how and when school
personnel will inform parents about that progress (e.g.,
quarterly reports, concurrent with the timing of report cards).

Explanation of the extent the The “reverse phrasing” of this requirement is purposeful. IDEA
student will not be educated requires the IEP team to justify any decision that removes the
with nondisabled students in student from the general education setting.
the general education setting

Statement of student’s This not only includes the extent to which the student will
participation in state and participate but also any testing accommodations or
district-wide assessments modifications that she may require.

The date of service initiation, Service initiation—the date that the special education and
frequency, duration, location related services identified in the IEP begins—should start as
soon as possible. The frequency (e.g., number of times per
week) and duration (e.g., length of time for each session)
specify the amount of services to be provided to the student,
clarifying the level of resource commitment. The location
where the services will be provided, or placement, cannot be
determined until all of the other IEP components have been
determined.

The student’s IEP must contain all seven components listed in the table above. Additionally, these
components must be internally consistent because determinations in one section are based on
information from another. In other words, all the parts must fit together seamlessly.

Implications of Endrew on IEP Development

Recall that the Endrew decision focused, in part, on the quality of the education, as laid out in the IEP, to
which students with disabilities are entitled. This individualized education must be developed based on
the student’s unique needs, or according to the Supreme Court, “reasonably calculated to enable the
child to make progress appropriate in light of his circumstances.” Let’s examine two of the terms from
that phrase more closely.

Reasonably calculated: The “reasonably calculated” standard recognizes that developing an appropriate

IEP requires a prospective judgment by the IEP team. Generally, this means that the team will make
decisions that are informed by their own expertise, the progress of the student, the student’s potential
for growth, and the views of the student’s parents. In determining whether an IEP is reasonably
calculated to enable a student to make progress, the IEP team should consider factors such as:

 The student’s previous rate of academic growth

 Whether the student is on track to achieve or exceed grade-level proficiency
 Any behaviors interfering with the student’s progress
 Additional information and input provided by the student’s parents

Progress appropriate in light of a child’s circumstances: Although the Supreme Court did not specifically
define the phrase in light of the child’s circumstances, the decision emphasized the individualized
decision-making required in the IEP process and the need to ensure that every student should have the
chance to meet challenging objectives. The ruling reinforced IDEA’s focus on the individual needs of
each student with a disability.

Listen as Mitchell Yell provides his insight on both of these terms.

I would say reasonably calculated means a couple things. What it means, in essence, is that we as an IEP
team make our best estimate based on a good and relevant and meaningful assessment of all the child’s
needs. What is the child’s potential for growth? And that was a term used by the Supreme Court. What’s
their potential for growth? And then we draw on our expertise as a team to make that prediction of
what should be reasonable growth. That’s why they say reasonably calculated—we reason together. A
couple of things are very important. Number one, the parents have to be part of that process. Another
thing that’s very important is the Supreme Court has said that due process hearing officers or courts can
ask, and we expect an answer when they ask, “Why did you think that would result in student
progress?” So, in other words, the ‘reasonably calculated’ means we use our best estimate, given all the
information that we collected in the assessment, we talked to the parents, we’ve decided what we think
that child’s potential for growth is. And courts and hearing officers can later ask and expect, according to
the Supreme Court, a cogent and responsive explanation to the question, “Why do you think that was
reasonable progress?” So, that’s what reasonably calculated means. We just use our best guess, given
the assessment, where we can expect the child to be.

The progress appropriate in light of a child’s circumstances. There was a real change because it used to
be appropriate progress and they changed that around to progress appropriate in light of a child’s
circumstances. What that means is, when we do our assessment of a child it must address all needs, be
relevant and meaningful, and then we take that information and we project out what the goal should
be. And these goals should be appropriate in light of those assessment results. So again, that is up to
our expertise as an IEP team, working together with the parents to look at that assessment and decide,
“What is the child’s potential for growth?” and then estimate or come up with our ideas of what a
reasonable but ambitious goal should be, based on the assessment.

The best practices, if we consider the term in light of the child’s circumstances, are number one: to
remember that the assessment is the baseline for everything that comes after it in the IEP. If we use the
analogy of a house being the actual IEP, the assessment is the foundations of the house. And if the
assessment is incorrect or the assessment isn’t a good foundation, the rest of the house or IEP tends to
fall. So everything is based on the assessment and that’s really the keystone of everything that we do. So
it means our best practices are: We do a relevant assessment of all of a child’s needs. And then we link
that to the rest of the IEP. If we identify a need, we have to address it with a goal or a service, but most
likely both a goal and a service. And then we have to monitor progress. But it’s all based on that original
assessment.

Substantive Requirements – what  is developed in the IEP

Whereas procedural requirements stipulate when and how  the IEP is developed, substantive

requirements represent what  is developed in the IEP. Substantive requirements involve the actual
content of the individualized special education program and focus on the educational benefit conferred
by a student’s IEP. The program must be aspirational, in that it maintains high expectations while
enabling the student to make meaningful progress, given the student’s unique needs.

With an understanding of the different components of the IEP and how they fit together to form a
cohesive program, the IEP team now can begin to develop an educationally meaningful IEP. The next
pages of the module address the ways in which the substantive requirements of IDEA can be met to
develop a high-quality IEP. More specifically, the pages explain how to determine:

 Present levels of academic achievement and functional performance statements

 Challenging, ambitious, and measurable goals
 Special education and related services
 How the student’s progress will be monitored and reported
 Common substantive errors and how to avoid them

Page 6: High-Quality PLAAFP Statements

SUBSTANTITIVE REQUIREMENT GUIDELINE. Make sure that all of the student’s educational needs
identified in the evaluation stage are included in the present levels of academic achievement and
functional performance section of the IEP.

One of the fundamental components of an IEP, a present levels of academic achievement and functional
performance (PLAAFP) statement summarizes the student’s current levels of functioning. State and
district documentation of this information varies. For example, some PLAAFP statements are written as
a single comprehensive summary that covers all areas in which the student needs support; others are
written as multiple smaller descriptions that address each area of need separately.

Regardless of the way it is organized, the PLAAFP statement must contain information for each
identified area of need based on the results of the student’s evaluation (the second step in the IEP
process). The PLAAFP statement serves as the foundation from which all other components of the IEP
will be built.

At a minimum, the PLAAFP statement must contain information that:

 Describes the student’s needs in an academic and/or functional skill area

 States the impact of the student’s disability on her involvement in the general education
curriculum
 Documents the student’s current levels of performance, which will serve as baseline data to
measure her subsequent progress
 Informs the annual goals and the appropriate special education services and supports required
to meet those goals

Alphabet Soup

Historically, IEPs contained information about a student’s present levels of performance (PLOP), also

referred to as present levels of educational performance (PLEP) in some schools or districts. When
Congress reauthorized IDEA in 2004, this was changed to the present levels of academic achievement
and functional performance (PLAAFP). The new term highlights the need for special education to address
all of a student’s needs. The addition of functional performance—nonacademic skills necessary for
independent living (e.g., behavior, social skills, communication, independent living skills, and mobility)—
reflects an awareness that students with disabilities require more than academic supports if they are to
meet their individual goals for long-term success.

PLOP: present levels of performance

PLEP: present levels of educational performance
PLAAFP: present levels of academic achievement and functional performance
Legislation and Litigation 

If the IEP fails to assess the ‘child’s present levels of academic achievement and functional performance’
the IEP does not comply with [IDEA]. This deficiency goes to the heart of the IEP; the child’s level of
academic achievement and functional performance is the foundation on which the IEP must be built.
Without a clear identification of [the child’s] present levels, the IEP cannot set measurable goals,
evaluate the child’s progress and determine which educational and related services are needed.
 Kirby v. Cabell County Board of Education, 2006, p. 694
There should be a direct relationship between the present levels of performance and the other
components of the IEP. Thus, if the statement describes a problem with the child’s reading level and
points to a deficiency in reading skills, the problem should be addressed under both goals and specific
special education and related services provided to the child.

U.S. Department of Education, Code of Federal Regulation, 1999, Appendix C, Question 36

Developing a High-Quality PLAAFP Statement

The IEP team can begin the process of developing a high-quality PLAAFP statement by holding a
discussion that centers around the four elements outlined above: student needs, effect on progress in
general education, baseline information, and connection to goals and/or services. By doing so, they will
begin to assemble the elements that will become the student’s PLAAFP statement. The table below
poses some questions that can help guide that conversation.

PLAAFP Description Guiding Questions

Elements

Student Information on the What are:

Needs student’s current  The student’s strengths?
academic and/or  The main areas of concern (e.g., academic,
functional needs functional) and how do these concerns relate
to district or state standards and benchmarks
and the student’s postsecondary interests?
 The parents’ concerns?
 The student’s instructional preferences?
 The results from the evaluation (e.g.,
standardized tests, progress monitoring data)?
 Ways in which the student’s strengths can
help address the identified areas of concern?

Effect on An explanation of how How does the student’s disability affect her:
Progress in the disability affects  Involvement in general education?
General the student’s  Access to the general education
Education involvement and curriculum?
progress in the general  Progress in the general education
education curriculum curriculum?

Baseline Baseline data for Are the data being reviewed to determine
Information monitoring student whether the student is making progress:
progress  Specific?
 Objective?
 Measurable?
  Something that can be collected
frequently?
And do these data relate to:
 Identified areas of concern?
 State content standards?

Connection Bridge between the Is there enough information in the PLAAFP to

to Goals PLAAFP statement and develop a challenging, ambitious, measurable
and/or an annual goal annual goal?
Services Is there enough information in the PLAAFP to
determine what special education, related
services, accommodations, and program
modifications are needed?
Note: These are simple “yes” or “no” questions.

When a student’s first IEP is developed, much of the information needed for the PLAAFP is collected in
the initial assessment. That information is outdated by the time a student’s IEP is ready for an annual
review, so school personnel will need to collect data prior to the IEP meeting. In this interview, Tamara
McLean shares how personnel at her school collaborate to collect the information and draft PLAAFP
statements (time: 1:06).

Transcript: Tamara McLean

In my school when we develop the PLAAFP statements, it’s a collaboration of many different people.
So if it is an O. T. skill, the O.T. is going to develop the wording, but she will send out an information
thing to fill out for the gen ed teacher, for the special ed teacher, on those areas so they can see how
it plays out in the classroom versus just their one-on-one setting. The case manager is really only
going to develop the areas that they serve. So if a child has an IEP that has math service and it has
reading service, the person who delivers the reading service is going to be the person who actually
fills in that part of the IEP. But they’re going to reach out to the reading teacher as well and get
information for how that plays out in the general education classroom. Really, it is a collaboration
for all areas because whether it’s pre-vocational, whether it’s social-emotional, whether it’s math,
whether it’s reading, it’s not just going to be one person who has information on that.

After the IEP team has discussed the information above, they can begin to write the PLAAFP
statement. As they do so, they should keep in mind that this statement should be written in
concise, specific, and clear language that can be easily understood by all members of the IEP
team. It should not merely identify the student’s disability and list the various assessment
scores, but instead should provide enough information to inform the development of the
student’s annual goals. The table below contains portions of one student’s PLAAFP statement
that relate to his reading skills and shows how each element is addressed.
 Element Example

Student Needs K is a 9-year-old, 4th-grade student who is eligible for special

education services under the category of Specific Learning
Disability. K has strong expressive and receptive language skills
and a large vocabulary. As a result, he actively engages in class
discussions and performs well on tasks that require auditory
comprehension (e.g., following multi-step directions, answering
comprehension questions about class discussions or about
passages that are read to him). His strong communication skills
have also earned him the friendship and respect of his peers,
many of whom look to K as a class leader.
K’s learning disability negatively affects his decoding skills, which
are at a low 2nd-grade level. His broad reading scores on
standardized tests are:
 Grade equivalent score: 2.2
 National percentile rank: 27
In addition to school-based concerns, K’s parents worry about the
effects of his learning disability outside of school. For example, K
avoids games that involve even a little bit of reading, resulting in
some conflicts during weekly family game nights, which often
involve board games. When the family eats out, K prefers one
restaurant whose menu he has memorized and protests if a new
restaurant is selected due to anxiety about reading an unfamiliar
menu.

Effect on Progress in The 4th-grade curriculum involves many independent reading

General Education activities. K’s decoding problems affect his performance in the
general education setting because he cannot independently read
items like written instructions, worksheets, or content area texts.
He is self-conscious about his reading difficulties and works hard
to hide his reading struggles from his classmates. As a result, he is
unwilling to utilize text-to-speech technologies on his tablet, even
with headphones, or partner with a peer reader.

Baseline Information K is currently reading 54 words correct per minute (wpm) on a

2nd-grade reading probe, which is slightly higher than the 2nd-
grade fall benchmark of 50 wpm. The 4th-grade fall benchmark is
95 wpm on a 4th-grade reading probe.

Connection to Goals Yes, there is enough information to determine annual goals

and/or Services and/or services and supports.

Page 7: Challenging, Ambitious, Measurable Annual Goals

SUBSTANTITIVE REQUIREMENT GUIDELINE: Develop challenging, ambitious, and measurable annual IEP
goals, based on the identified educational needs of the student.

The second required component of an IEP is the measurable annual goals section. The academic and/or
functional goals described in this section are intended to meet a student’s disability related needs that
enable her to be involved in and make progress in (a) the general education curriculum (e.g., achieve
grade-level mathematics skills) and (b) other education-related areas that arise from the student’s
disability (e.g., improve articulation, increase socially appropriate behaviors). Measurable annual goals
describe what the student is reasonably expected to accomplish in a 12-month period, when provided
with appropriate special education services. Each measurable annual goal should:

 Address academic and/or functional needs identified in a PLAAFP statement

 Be guided by grade-level content standards and therefore tied to participation in the general
education curriculum
 Include benchmarks or short-term objectives (for students taking alternate assessments aligned
to alternate achievement standards)
 Help IEP team members determine whether a student is making educational progress and
whether the special education program is providing meaningful educational benefit
 Lead to a corresponding special education service

Developing Measurable Annual Goals

To begin the process of writing measurable annual goals, the IEP team should:

 Start with the academic and functional needs identified in the PLAAFP statements
 Identify any relevant state academic standards for the student’s grade
 Discuss what the student should be able to achieve during the next 12 months

Once this is done, the team is ready to design annual goals that will help close the gap between the
student’s current skill levels and the expected academic and/or functional performance levels. Each goal
has four elements: a  target behavior, the conditions under which the target behavior will be exhibited
and measured, the criterion for acceptable performance, and the timeframe within which the student
will meet the criterion. To develop each element, the team members can ask guiding questions that will
help them narrow down the information that should be documented in each goal. The table below
outlines sample guiding questions for each element and offers tips for writing measurable annual goals.

Goal Elements Guiding Tips

Questions

Target What skill does Do: Use active terminology to describe the

Behavior: the the student target behavior. Examples:
academic or need to  Read aloud
functional skill demonstrate?  Calculate mathematics problems
to be changed  Initiate a positive peer-to-peer
interaction
Don’t: Use vague or passive terms that can be
open to interpretation. Examples:
 Enjoy reading
 Understand math problems
 Make friends
 Build self-esteem
 Develop vocational skills

Condition In what context Do: Use clear, specific language to describe

The context or does the the condition under which the target behavior
environment in student need will be performed. Examples:
which the target to demonstrate  Given a 3rd-grade level reading
behavior is to be that skill? passage…
exhibited and  When given a sheet of 20 double-digit
measured; may multiplication problems…
reference the  During the 20-minute morning
measurement recess…
tool Don’t: Use overly broad language or omit the
condition entirely. Examples:
 During reading…
 For math…
 No condition is listed

Criterion for How will we Do: Establish specific, measurable, and

Acceptable know the realistic—but challenging—performance
Performance student has criteria. Examples:
The level of achieved the  At a rate of 95 words correct per
performance at goal? minute (wpm)
which the IEP  With at least 85% accuracy on 3
team members consecutive weekly progress monitoring
can determine probes
that a student  At least once per recess, 3 out of 5
has achieved days, for 4 consecutive weeks, as deemed
the goal appropriate using a 3-point rubric
Don’t: Establish performance criteria that
reflect subjective opinions. Examples:
 At an increased rate
 Scores will improve over time
 Determined by teacher observation
 When he feels like it
 Timeframe By when can Do: Establish a specific and realistic
The period the student be timeframe. Examples:
within which expected to  By the end of the school year
the student can achieve the  By the end of the first nine-week
be expected to goal? grading period
meet the  By the end of October
performance Don’t: Omit the timeframe or establish an
criteria unrealistic timeframe (e.g., too long, too
short).

To help develop well-written, measurable goals, IEP teams may consider using the acronym SMART.
These characteristics, when applied to the four goal elements above, can support IEP team members in
the goal-development process. Learn more about SMART in the box below.

Clearly stated descriptions of each goal element: the conditions,

Specific the academic or functional skill, the criterion for success, and the
timeframe within which the criterion should be met

Quantifiable by a defined standard that can be observed in some

Measurabl way, particularly so that any amount of change can subsequently
e be identified and/or evaluated

Involving actions that are clearly observable (e.g., “Write a five-

Actively sentence paragraph.”) rather than implied (e.g., “Improve your
phrased writing.”)

Practical but ambitious and challenging and based on relevant

information (e.g., evaluation results, previous rates-of-growth,
Realistic the student’s unique circumstances, IEP team members’
professional judgment)

Involves a specified timeframe within which the skill is

Time-
limited anticipated to be mastered
Note: There are multiple versions of SMART in which the letters stand for different terms (e.g., ambitious
for ‘A’ or relevant for ‘R’). The primary factor to consider when using any of them is to determine
whether they will help develop better IEP goals.

The IEP team should keep in mind that these goals should be written in brief, specific, and clear
language that can be easily understood by all members of the IEP team. Keeping the SMART acronym in
mind, the goal below was written for K, the student from the previous page, based on his PLAAFP
statement.

Condition Target Behavior Performance Criterion Timeframe

Given a third-grade level K will read aloud at a rate of 115 words by the end of the
reading passage, correct per minute (wpm) school year.

The next two goals were written for a different student whose IEP included PLAAFP statements with
identified needs in the areas of mathematics calculation (double-digit multiplication) and initiating
appropriate peer interactions.

Condition Target Performance Criterion Timeframe

Behavior

When given a sheet of 20 J will calculate with at least 85% accuracy on 3 by the end of
double-digit the problems consecutive weekly progress the first 9-
multiplication problems, monitoring probes week period.

During the 20-minute J will initiate a at least once per recess, 3 out by the end of
morning recess, positive peer- of 5 days, for 4 consecutive October.
to-peer weeks, as deemed appropriate
interaction using a 3-point rubric

Note: The order in which the goal elements are written depends on the information laid out in the overall
goal. For example, the timeframe may be placed prior to the condition in some instances and after the
performance criterion in others.

In the interview below, Mitch Yell provides some insight into the need for measurable annual goals.
Although IEP teams have always been required to develop and include annual goals in students’ IEPs,
Congress changed this requirement to measurable annual goals in the 1997 reauthorization of IDEA. The
distinction is important because it is difficult, if not impossible, to show student growth if goals are not
measurable. (time 1:05).
Transcript: Mitchell Yell, PhD

Of all the IEPs that I’ve looked at, I think the most common problem is goals are written that are
not measurable. Well, if they’re not measurable how can you show progress? How can you change
instruction, because you don’t know if the child is actually learning? I would say, in terms of best
practice, what that means is we have to make certain our goals are measurable. We have to collect
data, and we have to say how we will collect data, how we’ll measure the child’s progress toward that
goal, and if the child isn’t making progress, then we have to make instructional changes. That
essentially is best practice. That doesn’t mean you have to have all the goals based on standardized
achievement tests. You could use curriculum-based assessment, but the most important thing about
these goals is that they must be measurable. And then we must measure them, and if the child is
progressing, that’s wonderful. If the child is not progressing, we need to do something about it.

Keep in Mind

In addition to measurable annual goals, IEPs must also include a statement of how a student’s progress
toward meeting these goals will be measured and reported. For example, progress may be reported
quarterly, concurrent with the issuance of report cards, to inform a student’s parents of her progress
toward meeting the annual goals. This will be discussed in more detail on Page 9.

Endrew  Implications for Developing Ambitious and Challenging Annual Goals

Although IDEA requires IEP goals to be measurable, courts have ruled that they must also
be ambitious and challenging. Goals that contain all four elements—target behavior, condition,
performance criterion, and timeframe—may be considered “complete” in a technical sense, but those
that are also ambitious and challenging are more likely to meet the Endrew substantive standard. IEP
teams should have high expectations for the student and create goals that are ambitious and
challenging enough for her to make meaningful progress. Additionally, goals should be realistic, based
on the team’s knowledge of the student’s unique circumstances.

Page 8: Individualized Services & Supports

SUBSTANTITIVE REQUIREMENT GUIDELINE: Identify special education services that will help the student
achieve all of her annual goals.
After the IEP team has developed the student’s annual goals, they can begin to develop the third
required component: the statement of the individualized services and supports the student requires to
meet these goals. These can include special education services and any necessary  related
services,  supplementary aids and services, and  program modifications. These services and supports
should enable a student to:

 Make progress toward meeting her academic and/or functional annual goals
 Be involved and make progress in the general education curriculum, and to participate in
extracurricular (e.g., drama club) and other nonacademic (e.g., attending a school football game)
activities
 Participate in these activities with other students, both with and without disabilities

The various types of services to be considered for each student, as outlined in IDEA, are included below.
Additionally, we’ve included examples of each of the four types of services and supports for Yazmina, a
high-school student who is blind.

Service Explanation Example

Special Education  Specially designed instruction that Yazmina receives instruction

meets the unique needs of a student in specialized skills,
with a disability in the areas of including how to read and
academics, functional and behavioral write in braille. This
skills, and/or secondary transition instruction is provided by
 More intensive and individualized a teacher of students with
instruction than is typically provided in visual impairments (TVI).
the general education classroom
 Provided by an education
professional with expertise in
individualizing and intensifying
instruction, progress monitoring, and
data-based decision making

Related Services  Supportive services necessary for Yazmina

that student to benefit from special receives orientation and
education services mobility (O&M) services
 Examples include transportation, that teach her how to use a
psychological services, speech- cane to travel
language therapy, occupational independently from place to
therapy, physical therapy, counseling, place, among other skills.
social work services, and school health These services are provided
services by an orientation and
 Not allowable: services delivered mobility (O&M) specialist.
by a medical doctor or those related to
insertion, optimization, or maintenance
or replacement of surgically implanted
medical devices (e.g., cochlear implant)
 Usually provided one or more
times per week for short periods of
time (e.g., two sessions/week, 30
minutes each)
 The student can receive more than
 one related service, based on her
individual needs

Supplementary  Accommodations or modifications  Yazmina receives numerous

Aids and Services that allow the student to access both accommodations to help
education-related and nonacademic her succeed in her general
school-related activities education classes. Some of
 Can also include: those include:
o Other types of direct  A larger desk to
services and supports to the hold her refreshable
student (e.g., health care assistant braille display
for a student with significant  Readings, handouts,
health needs) and tests provided in
o Support and training for alternate formats
relevant school staff (e.g., (e.g., digital text, braille)
collaborative planning time for  Extended time on
teachers) tests, because braille
takes longer to read
 A peer sighted
guide for all marching
band activities (e.g.,
rehearsals, evening and
weekend football
games, parades)

Program  Supports provided to school Yazmina’s teachers receive

Modifications and personnel to assist them in helping a training on how to use her
Supports for student achieve his or her annual goals equipment and information
School Personnel and to be involved in the general on the support that the TVI
education classroom can provide (e.g., translating
 Can include things like training on worksheets into braille).
special equipment, adaptations to the
general education classroom, or
specialized training for the general
education teacher

Determining Appropriate Services and Supports

The statement of services in a student’s IEP must be written clearly so that the school’s commitment of
resources is apparent to parents and other members of the IEP team. To develop this statement of
services, the IEP team should consider the overarching question: What services and supports does the
student need in order to achieve her annual IEP goals? To help them answer these questions, they can
use the guiding questions below.

Statement Guiding Questions Considerations

 Elements

Type of What types of The services should:

Service services and  Address all of the student’s annual goals (e.g.,
supports does the academic, functional, behavior), including those
student need? necessary to participate in extracurricular activities
 Include any combination of the four types of
services (listed above) necessary to address the
student’s needs
 Address secondary transition needs for
students age 16 and older (earlier for states with
younger age requirements)
 Employ evidence-based practices whenever
feasible

Frequency How often should Combined, the frequency and duration of services

these services and should:
supports be  Be sufficiently intensive to help the student
provided? achieve her annual goals
(Example)
Duration How much time  Be based on the student’s needs, not on
per day/week is service availability. For example, the number of times
needed for the per week that a student receives speech-language
services and therapy should be based on the amount of time
supports? necessary to help her make adequate progress, not on
the number of days that an SLP is currently at the
school.

Person Who will provide The person responsible should:

Responsible the services and  Have adequate training and expertise to be
supports? able to deliver the services
 Be able to implement evidence-based
practices with fidelity
 Be able to collect and analyze data and make
data-based decisions

Environment Where will the When determining environment, the IEP team should:
services and  Identify placement only after specialized
supports be instruction, services, supports, frequency, duration,
provided? and person responsible have been determined
 Make a concerted effort to place—and
maintain—the student in the general education
setting, with the use of supplementary aids and
services when necessary
 Recognize that, for some students, placement
 in more-restrictive settings may be necessary to
ensure an appropriate education
(Example)
 Document the reasons for any decision that
results in the student’s services being delivered
outside of the general education setting
For more information, view the following:
LRE Information Brief

Service When will services The services should:

Start/End begin and end?  Start immediately (e.g., the next day), unless
Dates there are extenuating circumstances to be resolved
(e.g., transportation)
 Include an end date within one year from the
current IEP meeting. This does not mean that the
services stop, however. The end date is often planned
for the student’s annual review, so the services would
be updated according to decisions made at that future
meeting.

When determining the student’s services, IDEA also requires that the student’s IEP team consider the
following special factors and address any that are relevant.

 The use of positive behavioral interventions and supports (PBIS) if the student’s behaviors
impede her learning or the learning of others
 The language needs of the student if she has limited English proficiency
 If the student is blind or has a visual disability, provide for instruction in and use of braille,
unless the team determines after evaluation that braille is not appropriate
 The student’s communication needs, and when the student is deaf or hard of hearing, the
student’s opportunities to communicate directly with peers and teachers as well as to
receive direct instruction in his or her language and communication mode.
 Whether a student needs assistive technology devices and services

Endrew  Implications for Determining Special Education Services

The student at the center of the Endrew  case, Drew, had significant behavioral challenges, yet he made
progress in the private school, which developed a behavioral intervention plan (BIP). His success points
to two key considerations for IEP teams when they begin to determine special education services and
supports:

1. The services should address all of the student’s needs

2. The services should include evidence-based practices whenever possible.
Legislation and Litigation 

The Federal Register is published every business day by the National Archives and Records
Administration and contains, among other things, federal agency regulations, notices, and
proclamations. In 2006, prior to publishing the final regulations for IDEA, the U.S. Department of
Education published the proposed regulations in the Federal Register and solicited comments from the
general public. In response to requests to clarify the use of peer-reviewed research whenever possible,
the Department wrote:

States, school districts, and school personnel must, therefore, select and use methods that research has
shown to be effective, to the extent that methods based on peer-reviewed research are available…The
final decision about the special education and related services, and supplementary aids and services that
are to be provided to the child must be made by the child’s IEP Team based on the child’s individual
needs.

U.S. Department of Education,  Federal Register, Vol. 71 No. 156, 46665

Services To Address Behavior

It should come as no surprise that when Drew’s behavioral challenges were addressed at the private
school his academics improved. When any student has a history of problem behavior, or if such
behaviors can be readily anticipated, the student’s IEP must address that behavior. This requirement
applies to all students who receive special education services, regardless of their disability category.
IDEA requires that if a student with disabilities exhibits problem behaviors that impede her learning or
the learning of others, the student’s IEP team shall consider the use of PBIS.

An IEP that does not address behavioral challenges may fail to provide FAPE to a student with behavior
problems. Litigation has clarified that FAPE is denied when schools and/or IEP teams fail to:

 Consider the inclusion of PBIS in response to the student’s behavior

 Schedule an IEP meeting to review the IEP to address behavioral concerns after a reasonable
parental request or school-based personnel become aware of problem behaviors
 Discuss concerns of parents or school personnel about the student’s behavior and its effects on
the student’s learning during an IEP meeting
 Implement the behavior supports in the student’s IEP. The student’s FAPE can also be
jeopardized when behavioral supports that are not included in the IEP or that are not appropriate
for the student are implemented.

Services Based on Peer-Reviewed Research

Another consideration when determining services and supports for students with disabilities is to use
evidence-based practices. The term evidence-based practice is used currently to refer to instructional
techniques and interventions that meet peer-reviewed standards. However, there are other terms that
refer to less-stringent requirements, and educators should be aware of the differences. To help clarify
the terminology, the table below highlights some common terms you may encounter when searching for
an EBP.

Evidence-Based Practice  Shown to have a positive effect on student outcomes

 The research design allows one to infer that the practice
led to child or student improvement
 Multiple high-quality studies have been conducted
 Reviewed by a reputable organization (e.g., What Works
Clearinghouse)

Promising Practice  Shown to have positive effects on learner outcomes

 The research design does not clearly demonstrate that the
practice led to child or student improvement
 Insufficient number of studies conducted to demonstrate
its effectiveness

Research-Based Practice  Some research studies have demonstrated positive effects

on student outcomes while other studies have not
 Based on research that may or may not clearly
demonstrate that the practice led to improved child or student
outcomes
 Multiple studies have been conducted

Emerging Practice  Anecdotal evidence of effectiveness

 Research has not been conducted

IDEA requires that a student’s services and supports be based on peer-reviewed research (i.e., evidence-
based practices) “to the extent practicable.” However, due to inherent difficulties posed by research,
limited time, and lack of funding, not all educational practices and programs have been subjected to
rigorous research. In the first interview below, Bryan Cook explains valid reasons for why some practices
may not be evidence-based. In the second interview, he discusses the differences between evidence-
based practices and promising practices and how to prioritize their use.

Tip - To help relevant school personnel understand their responsibilities and implement the IEP as
intended, each can be provided with a short form that specifies his responsibilities and outlines
confidentiality requirements. This form allows a quick reference, without having to search through the
entire IEP to find their relevant portion of the document. The document in the IEP Toolbox below is an
example of this type of form.

Page 9: Monitoring & Reporting Student Progress

Document how, and how frequently, a student’s progress toward his or her IEP goals will be
measured and reported.
As we discussed on previous pages, a student’s PLAAFP statements inform her annual goals,
which inform decisions about the special education and related services she will receive. Once
these services and supports are identified, the IEP team needs to decide how they will
determine whether the student’s program is effective (i.e., helping the student make
appropriate progress). IDEA requires that every IEP contain a component in which IEP teams
document:

 How a student’s progress toward meeting each annual goal will be measured
 When periodic reports on that progress will be provided to parents

Developing a Progress Monitoring Plan

To monitor student progress, IEP teams must make decisions about the nature of the data that
will be collected and analyzed relevant to each annual goal. The most appropriate progress
monitoring systems are those in which objective numerical data are collected frequently,
graphed, analyzed, and then used to make instructional decisions. Anecdotal data and other
subjective procedures are not appropriate for monitoring student progress and should not be
the basis of a progress monitoring system.

To determine how a student’s progress toward meeting his or her annual goals will be
measured, the team members can consider the guiding questions in the table below. The
team’s collective responses to these questions should align with each annual goal and therefore
be specific, measurable, realistic, and relevant to the timeframe.

Guiding Questions Tips

How will the student’s Do: Use objective measures (e.g., data that can be reported
progress be objectively in numbers rather than words). Examples:
measured?  Behavior observation checklists
 Progress monitoring probes (e.g., reading, math)
 Unit or chapter test scores
Don’t: Use subjective measures. Examples:
  Anecdotal reports
 Teacher or student perceptions

How often will the Do: Measure frequently and systematically. Examples:

student’s progress be  Every two weeks
measured?  At least three times per week
Don’t: Measure so inconsistently or infrequently that data-
based changes to services and supports can’t occur.
Examples:
 Every nine weeks
 Three times per year

Who is responsible for Do: Identify an individual with appropriate data-collection

collecting progress training. Examples:
monitoring data?  General education teacher
 Special education teacher
 School psychologist
Don’t: Assume that an individual has the requisite skills to
collect data.

Where will data collection Do: Clearly identify each relevant setting or context in which
occur? data will be collected. Examples:
 During reading instruction
 On the playground during recess
Don’t: Broadly describe the setting or context (e.g., in the
general education setting) or omit it completely.

When will data collection Do: Maintain a consistent data-collection schedule.

occur? Examples:
 Mondays, Wednesdays, and Fridays at 10:00 am
 Tuesdays during reading
Don’t: Collect data on an inconsistent basis. Examples:
 Monday at the beginning of reading class (9:00 am)
and then Wednesday right before recess (10:30 am)
 At the teacher’s convenience
 When the student is in a good mood

How well will the student Do: Use the performance criterion from the annual goal.
need to perform in order to Examples:
achieve his or her stated  Perform a task with 85% accuracy during 3 out of 5
IEP goals (i.e., performance observations
criteria)?  Read at a rate of 95 words per minute with less than
5 errors on 2 out of 3 reading passages
 Begin working on a task with 2 or fewer prompts
from the teacher 4 out of 5 days
 Don’t: Use different performance criterion than those stated
in the annual goals.

Note: State and local educational agencies have discretion to determine the measurement method, the specific
content of the periodic reports about students’ progress provided to parents, and the frequency with which these
reports will be generated.

A good practice for assessing student progress is to use data from formative assessments to
measure progress on the academic skill or functional behavior specified in the annual goal.
These data can also be used to inform instructional decision making. Regularly and
systematically collecting and monitoring student data allows the IEP team to evaluate the
appropriateness of the student’s IEP. It also gives the team time, when the student is not
making progress, to make adjustments to the student’s educational program so that she might
still achieve the annual goals. These adjustments might include using different instructional
methods, providing different services and supports, or reconsidering the student’s LRE.

The plan for monitoring and reporting student progress need not be cumbersome or overly
time-consuming. In fact, plans that are too unwieldy or burdensome are less likely to be
implemented with fidelity, if at all. IEP teams should consider monitoring and reporting
methods that are user-friendly and time-efficient.

In this interview, Tamara McLean explains how different types of assessments help to inform
both general education and special education teachers on a student’s progress (time: 2:55).

Legislation and Litigation 

The use of “teacher observation” by itself is not a legitimate way of monitoring student
progress. As the New York State Educational Agency noted in a 2003 hearing…

although subjective teacher observation provides valuable information, teacher

observation is not an adequate method of monitoring student progress

and

Without supporting data, teacher observation is opinion which cannot be verified

Board of Education of the Rhinebeck Central School District, 2003, p. 148

The progress monitoring plan should be clear and easy to understand. The data collected
should be used to adjust the IEP document as needed. As the hearing officer in Escambia
County Public School System (2004) concluded:
The most glaring deficiency was the absence of a notation as to whether [the
student] had mastered any of his benchmarks . . . without the dates of mastery of
benchmarks indicated on the IEP a parent cannot determine the progress that the
child has been making during the school year… it is crucial that a parent (or other IEP
member) be able to examine the IEP document to see if satisfactory progress is being
made toward the attainment of the student’s annual goals and if not, whether there
is a need for adjustments to his program (42 IDELR 248).

Reporting Progress to Parents

The IEP team must stipulate when periodic reports on the student’s progress will be provided to
her parents. These reports keep the parents informed regarding whether their child is on track
to achieve her annual goals. In cases in which the student is not on track to meet her goals, the
report should describe the adjustments that school personnel intend to implement to help her
do so. Depending on the nature of these adjustments, it might be necessary to schedule an IEP
meeting to review the student’s individualized education program.

A good rule of thumb is to provide progress reports on the student’s annual goals at least as
frequently as parents of students without disabilities receive progress reports (e.g., report
cards). This is in addition to the daily or weekly progress reports that many teachers send
home. For example, the parents of a 2nd-grade student who only receives special education
services for reading might receive:

 The same weekly academic and behavior updates as the other parents
 A report card every nine weeks with grades for all of their child’s subjects
 A report on her progress toward meeting her annual IEP goals in reading

IEP teams should facilitate the parents’ understanding of the data so that they can clearly
determine whether their child is making progress toward all of her annual goals. There are
several considerations to keep in mind when reporting progress to parents:

 Avoid using jargon

 Use graphs to provide visual representations of the data
 Present information in parent’s home language whenever possible
 State clearly whether the student is on track to meet her annual goals

In this interview, Tamara McLean explains two different ways that teachers at her school report
progress to parents (time: 1:20).
Implications of Endrew on Progress Monitoring and Reporting

Legislation and Litigation 

A substantive standard not focused on student progress would do little to remedy the
pervasive and tragic academic stagnation that prompted Congress to act.

Endrew F. v. Douglas County School District, 2017, p. 11

For Your Information
There is probably less substantive compliance with this component of the IEP than any other.
Too often teachers don’t understand how to effectively collect and interpret data.

Recall that the Endrew ruling concerned itself, in part, with the quality of the education, as laid
out in their IEPs, to which students with disabilities are entitled. The Supreme Court’s ruling
requires that a higher substantive standard must now be used to determine educational
benefit: An IEP must be “reasonably calculated to enable a child to make progress appropriate
in light of the child’s circumstances.” To determine whether the student is making progress, IEP
teams must create and implement a high-quality plan that allows them to systematically and
consistently monitor and report the student’s progress toward meeting her annual goals. This
plan must include a process for collecting objective data that can document improved academic
and/or functional performance. As mentioned above, if the data indicate that a student is not
on track to meet her annual goals, the IEP team should make adjustments to the education
program and continue to monitor accordingly. Failure to make such adjustments, when data
indicate the need, could result in a ruling that a school had denied FAPE to a student.

In the interview below, Mitchell Yell discusses monitoring and reporting considerations for
students with disabilities (time: 0:59).

Page 10: Substantive Requirements: Common Errors

requirements represent what  is developed in the IEP. Substantive requirements involve the

actual content of the individualized special education program and focus on the educational
benefit conferred by a student’s IEP. The program must be aspirational, in that it maintains high
expectations while enabling the student to make meaningful progress, given the student’s
unique needs.

On the previous pages of this module, we addressed the ways in which the substantive
requirements of IDEA can be met to develop a high-quality, educationally meaningful IEP. In
contrast, IEPs that do not meet the substantive standard can result in an IEP that will not confer
educational benefit to the student. Therefore, IEP teams should be aware of some of the more
common substantive errors so that they can avoid them.

Failing to conduct a complete and individualized evaluation of a student's needs

Failing to include all of a student's educational needs in the PLAAFP
Failing to write challenging, ambitious, and measurable annual IEP goals
Failing to provide special education services that address all of a student's
educational needs
Placing students for reasons unrelated to their individual needs
Failing to adhere to the continuum of alternative placements
Failing to monitor students’ progress
You may have noticed that the first of the common substantive errors listed above, failure to
conduct a complete individualized evaluation, appears at first glance to be a procedural error.
The distinction between procedural errors and substantive errors is not always clear, as
Mitchell Yell explains below. Regardless, any type of error, whether procedural or substantive,
that results in a failure to provide FAPE to a student with a disability, is serious (time 1:38).

Assessment

Take some time now to answer the following questions. Please note that the IRIS Center does
not collect your Assessment responses. If this is a course assignment, you should turn them in
to your professor using whatever method he or she requires. If you have trouble answering any
of the questions, go back and review the Perspectives & Resources pages in this module.

1. What is an IEP? What purpose does it serve?

2. Explain the difference between procedural requirements and substantive

requirements for developing IEPs. How did the Endrew  case clarify the substantive
standard for IEPs?

3. Bella is a 7th-grader with a learning disability. Her IEP includes the following PLAAFP
statement for reading:
 Bella reads at the 4th-
grade level at approximately 100 wpm (orally). Her oral reading rate includes many
incorrect words. When asked comprehension questions about fictional text, she is able to
identify broad concepts such as main characters and events. However, she has difficulty
identifying main ideas and supporting details in content area texts (e.g., science, social
studies). She struggles with abstract concepts, inferences, deductions, and connecting
what she has read to real-world examples.

a. This is not an example of a high-quality PLAAFP statement. Identify the

elements that are missing or incomplete. For those that are incomplete,
discuss information that should be included.
b. Based on the PLAAFP statement, Bella’s IEP team developed the following
annual goal: When given a textbook passage at the 4.2 grade level, Bella will
read the passage aloud at a rate of 100 wpm by the end of the school year.

 Does this annual goal contain all of the required elements? If

not, identify any missing element(s).

 Does this annual goal meet the SMART criteria? Explain your
answer.

 Is this annual goal sufficient to meet all of Bella’s needs in

reading? Justify your answer.
b. Bella’s IEP team is ready to develop the statement of the individualized
services and supports for her IEP. List and briefly describe the six
elements that should be included in this statement.
 Explain the importance of monitoring a student’s progress toward
meeting his or her IEP goals and reporting that progress to parents.