1. Free Appropriate Public Education (FAPE)
Yell / The Law and Special Education, Second Edition
Copyright © 2006 by Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved

2. Free Appropriate Public Education
FAPE is a right that must be made available to all eligible students with disabilities
Provided at public expense
Provided in conformity with the IEP
Meet state standards
Includes students in disabilities who have been suspended or expelled
Yell / The Law and Special Education, Second Edition
Copyright © 2006 by Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved

3. Free Education No Exceptions Clarifications
Without charge to parents only
Applies only to special education & related services
Yell / The Law and Special Education, Second Edition
Copyright © 2006 by Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved

4. Appropriate Education
What is appropriate must be decided on a case by case basis
Must meet state standards
Provided in conformity with IEP
Yell / The Law and Special Education, Second Edition
Copyright © 2006 by Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved

5. Public Education Meets state standards
Includes children placed in private facilities by the school district
If children are placed in private facilities the school must make a FAPE available
Yell / The Law and Special Education, Second Edition
Copyright © 2006 by Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved

6. Appropriate Education: A Process
Child Find
Protection in Evaluation
Procedural Safeguards
IEP process
Meaningful Goals
Placement in the LRE
Parental involvement
Yell / The Law and Special Education, Second Edition
Copyright © 2006 by Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved

7. FAPE must meet a student’s unique educational needs including:
Mastery of academic subjects & basic skills
Social , health, emotional, physical, & vocational needs
Functional & self-help skills
Yell / The Law and Special Education, Second Edition
Copyright © 2006 by Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved

8. Board of Education v. Rowley 458,U.S. 176 (1982)
Facts of the case: Amy Rowley
Administrative rulings
Federal District Court
2nd Circuit Court
US Supreme Court
Yell / The Law and Special Education, Second Edition
Copyright © 2006 by Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved

9. FAPE
“We hold that the state satisfies the FAPE requirement by providing personalized instruction with sufficient support services to permit the child to benefit educational from that instruction” Rowley p
Yell / The Law and Special Education, Second Edition
Copyright © 2006 by Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved

10. The Rowley Twofold Inquiry
Has the state complied with the procedures in the act?
Amy’s school passed the procedural test
Is the IEP reasonably calculated to enable the child to receive educational benefits?
Amy was passing from grade to grade
Yell / The Law and Special Education, Second Edition
Copyright © 2006 by Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved

11. Problem with Rowley
Amy Rowley’s achievement status allowed the high court to sidestep prong two of the test
The substantive standard
The FAPE standard is satisfied when a school is following procedural requirements and writes an IEP that confers some educational benefit
Yell / The Law and Special Education, Second Edition
Copyright © 2006 by Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved

12. Subsequent FAPE Decisions
Two circuit courts (4th and the 3rd) held that schools cannot meet their obligations under IDEA by providing a program that produces only trivial or De Minimus educational benefit
The substantive right is “meaningful benefit”
Meaningful benefit has to be decided individually for each student, no generic formula can be applied nor can a disabled child’s progress be compared to nondisabled children
Yell / The Law and Special Education, Second Edition
Copyright © 2006 by Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved

13. Polk v. Susquehanna ISD, 3rd Cir. 1988
FAPE can only be determined on an individual case by case basis
IDEA calls for more than trivial benefit
Does passing grades automatically constitute a FAPE? NO
Yell / The Law and Special Education, Second Edition
Copyright © 2006 by Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved

14. Cypress-Fairbanks ISD v. Michael F., 5th Circuit, 1997
Educational benefit means that the educational program must be likely to produce meaningful , not trivial, progress
Four part test
Was the program individualized on the basis of the student’s assessment?
Was the program in the LRE?
Were the services provided in a collaborative manner by key stakeholders?
Were positive academic & nonacademic benefits demonstrated?
Yell / The Law and Special Education, Second Edition
Copyright © 2006 by Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved

15. Educational Methodology Disputes
Rowley: methodology disputes are best left to educational experts, because such disputes exceed the expertise of the courts
Courts grant schools great leeway in choosing educational methods
Exemption-If school doesn’t provide a FAPE (meaningful progress)
Courts: Educators need to select teaching methods that match a student’s unique needs
Yell / The Law and Special Education, Second Edition
Copyright © 2006 by Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved

16. Extended School Year Must be provided if needed for a FAPE Guidelines
Flexibility
Regression
Recoupment
Purpose of ESY is not to provide greater benefit
Incorporated into the 1999 IDEA regulations
Yell / The Law and Special Education, Second Edition
Copyright © 2006 by Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved

17. IDEA 1997, 2004 & FAPE
The underlying theme of these reauthorizations was to improve the effectiveness of special education by requiring demonstrable improvements in the educational achievement and functional performance of students with disabilities
Emphasis on writing measurable annual goals, explaining how they will be measured, them measuring them (progress monitoring), and reporting the results to parents
Yell / The Law and Special Education, Second Edition
Copyright © 2006 by Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved

18. Components of a FAPE Procedural Requirements Substantive Requirements
Individualized Instruction
Educational Benefit
Progress toward IEP goals
Related Services
Least Restrictive Environment
Yell / The Law and Special Education, Second Edition
Copyright © 2006 by Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved

19. Violations of FAPE Inadequate evaluations
Lack of knowledgeable persons in IEP team
Not notifying or involving parents
Determining placement prior to writing the IEP
Inadequacies in the IEP
The education will not confer “meaningful educational benefit”
Yell / The Law and Special Education, Second Edition
Copyright © 2006 by Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved