3. Establish requirements for review and revision of policies, practices and procedures.

In the case of a determination of significant disproportionality with respect to the identification of children as children with disabilities, or the placement in particular educational settings of these children, in accordance with §300.646(a) of the IDEA regulations, the State or the Secretary of the Interior must:
  • Provide for the review and, if appropriate revision of the policies, procedures, and practices used in the identification or placement to ensure that the policies, procedures, and practices comply with the requirements of the Act.
  • Require any LEA identified under §300.646(a) of IDEA to reserve the maximum amount of funds under section 613(f) of the Act to provide comprehensive coordinated early intervening services to serve children in the LEA, particularly, but not exclusively, children in those groups that were significantly overidentified under §300.646(a) of the IDEA regulations; and
  • Require the LEA to publicly report on the revision of policies, practices, and procedures described under §300.646(b)(1) of the IDEA regulations.
[34 CFR 300.646(b)] [20 U.S.C. 1418(d)(2)]

Dialogue Starter - Cross-stakeholder

Reaction Questions

  1. How might a focused review of policy and procedures raise awareness of disproportionality issues?

  2. If disproportionality is identified, how will the new provision create opportunities and impetus for meaningful change?

  3. In what ways is the issue of disproportionate placement of racial/ethnic students in special education important to you and your stakeholder group?

  4. With the implementation of early intervening services (EIS), what do you predict will be the effect of these services on disproportionality within your district/state?

  5. From your experience, please share examples of effective academic and/or behavioral strategies that may reduce disproportionality?

Application Questions

  1. If disproportionality is identified, the local district must use the maximum (15%) of IDEA Part B to provide early intervening services. What are some examples of early intervening services that have been found to be effective for preventing and/or reducing referrals to special education for identified student groups? How will your district begin to implement identified practices”?

  2. How does your state/district disseminate information to the public? How might the public reporting of policy, practice, and procedures affect their development and revision?

  3. What stakeholders, including families and students of those groups that are disproportionately represented, might be involved in the review and revision of policy, procedures, and practices?

  4. What impact might implementation of an early intervening services process have on disproportionality?

    These questions were developed by the following stakeholders working together:

    Role: Teacher
    Location: California

    Role: Administrator
    Location: Florida

    Role: Policymaker
    Location: Arizona

    Role: Higher Education
    Location: Indiana

    Role: Family
    Location: West Virginia

    Role: Administrator
    Location: Georgia

    Role: TA Provider
    Location: Colorado

    Role: Administrator
    Location: Virginia

    Role: Service Provider
    Location: Kentucky

    Role: Teacher
    Location: Florida

    Role: Administrator
    Location: Illinois

    Role: Teacher
    Location: South Carolina

    Role: Higher Ed
    Location: New York