Endrew F. v. County of Douglas School District (2017)
- Sam Shepherd
- Jul 4, 2024
- 5 min read
By Stephanie Aguilar
Overview
In Endrew F. v. County of Douglas School District, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that public schools must offer an Individualized Education Plan (IEP) that is “reasonably calculated to enable a child to make progress that is appropriate in their circumstances,” thus raising the standards for the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA).
Summary
Endrew F., a child with autism, attended a public school in Douglas County School District. However, after four to five years of minimal progress with his IEPs, his parents grew dissatisfied and decided to enroll Endrew in the Firefly Autism House, a private school that specializes in teaching children with autism. At Firefly, Endrew’s behavior began to improve with the help of a targeted “behavioral intervention plan” (Endrew F. v. Douglas County School District, 2017).
Endrew’s parents filed a complaint seeking reimbursement for Endrew’s tuition at Firefly, arguing that the “final IEP proposed by the school district was not reasonably calculated to enable [Endrew] to receive educational benefits,” thus denying Endrew a free and appropriate public education (FAPE) (Endrew F. v. Douglas County School District, 2017). After their relief was denied by an Administrative Law Judge, Endrew’s parents took their case to the District Court.
The District Court of Colorado concluded that although Endrew showed limited/minimal growth with the school district’s IEPs, the annual changes in the IEPs demonstrated “a pattern of, at the least, minimal progress” (Endrew F. v. Douglas County School District, 2017). Therefore, the District Court affirmed the decision of the Administrative Law Judge.
The Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit affirmed the decision, ruling that an IEP is considered “adequate” if it provides Endrew with “some educational benefit” that allows for “some progress.”
Board of Ed. Of Hendrick Hudson Central School Dist., Westchester Cty. v. Rowley had set a precedent for what constitutes a free appropriate public education (FAPE) under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). The U.S. Supreme Court held that schools satisfy the requirements of the Act if the student’s IEP is “reasonably calculated to enable the child to receive educational benefits” (Board of Educ. v. Rowley). Many arguments and rulings in Endrew F. v. Douglas County School District were based on this precedent.
In Endrew F. v. Douglas County School District, the Supreme Court unanimously reversed the lower court’s decisions, ruling that schools “must offer an IEP reasonably calculated to enable a child to make progress appropriate in light of the child’s circumstances.” This landmark decision emphasized that schools must provide educational benefits tailored to meet the “unique needs of a child with a disability” (Endrew F. v. Douglas County School District, 2017). The Court refused to reinterpret the FAPE requirements from Rowley, rejecting Endrew’s parents’ argument for equal educational opportunities for all children (disabled and non-disabled). And held that IEPs must be uniquely designed for each student, with the judgement of school authorities, and there must be clear rationale behind their decisions. The case was vacated (canceled) and remanded (sent back for further review).
Impact
The Endrew F. v. Douglas County School District decision set a higher standard for what constitutes a free appropriate public education (FAPE) under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). Public schools must ensure that IEPs are designed for each student with the goal of making progress appropriate to their unique needs and circumstances. Previously, schools only needed to make sure the IEPs allowed students to make “minimal progress” but now they are required to go beyond and tailor these plans for each individual student with disabilities.
After the decision, legal cases involving FAPE had to be reassessed. In “The Aftermath of Endrew F.: An Outcome Analysis Eighteen Months Later,” Perry A. Zirkel examined the outcomes following the Endrew decision. Zirkel found that out of “68 relevant rulings… [in] the eighteen-month period,” 85% showed no change in the original ruling, about 7% were remanded (sent back to a lower court for reconsideration), and 7% were reversed. The Endrew decision may not drastically change court rulings on FAPE cases, but it could influence the behaviors of those creating special education programs, “IEPs”, as well as “hearing officer decisions and/or settlements” (Zirkel 6). Overall, this benefits students with disabilities by ensuring they receive a higher quality education.
Additionally, following the decision in Endrew F. v. County of Douglas School District, several states have begun to turn their attention to special education, allocating more funding and improving special education services and programs. For instance, in the 2018 Budget and Legislative Priorities and State Aid Request, the New York State Education Department proposed an $11 million increase in “public and private excess cost aid for special education services.” With this increase of funding, special education services could be improved, and students with disabilities will have access to more support and resources. Furthermore, the Texas Education Agency (“TEA”) responded to the Endrew decision by releasing its 2018 Special Education Strategic Plan. This plan included actions such as monitoring “all local education agencies (LEAs) in the state to ensure compliance with IDEA requirements,” establishing review and support teams for LEAs, and providing “technical assistance and support for LEAs related to special education” (“Special Education Strategic Plan”). Further within the plan, TEA emphasized ensuring that school districts comply with the “child find mandate” which legally requires them “identify, locate, and evaluate all children residing within the district who are suspected of having a disability and in need of special education and related services because of the disability.” This ensures that children with disabilities are identified early, enabling them to receive timely support and services tailored to their needs, thus improving their academic development in school.
In conclusion, the Endrew F. v. Douglas County School District decision established a higher standard for Free Appropriate Public Education (FAPE) under Individual with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), by requiring Individualized Education Programs (IEPS) to aim for progress based on each student’s unique circumstances. Despite the varied outcomes in legal cases, the Endrew decision had influenced educational practices and policies, promoting states like New York to increase funding in special education.
Court Documents
To read the full Supreme Court Opinions and Dissents, click here:
Endrew F. v. Douglas County School District RE–1, 580 U.S. ___ (2017) https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/580/15-827/#tab-audio-and-media
To read the Court of Appeals Tenth Circuit 2015 Opinion, click here:
Endrew F. v. Douglas County School District, No. 14-1417 (10th Cir. 2015)
To read the Court of Appeals Tenth Circuit 2017 Order and Judgement, click here:
Endrew F. v. Douglas County School District, No. 14-1417 (10th Cir. 2017)
To read the District Court for the District of Colorado Memorandum Opinion and Order 2018, click here:
To listen to the oral argument of the Endrew F. v. County of Douglas School District case, click here:
To read more about the Board of Educ. V. Rowley case, click here:
Board of Educ. v. Rowley, 458 U.S. 176 (1982)
Citations
Board of Educ. v. Rowley, 458 U.S. 176 (1982)
Endrew F. v. Douglas County School District RE–1, 580 U.S. ___ (2017)
New York State Education Department. “Board of Regents Advances 2018 Budget and Legislative Priorities and State Aid Request for the 2018-2019 School Year.” New York State Education Department, 11 December 2017, https://www.nysed.gov/news/2023/board-regents-advances-2018-budget-and-legislative-priorities-and-state-aid-request-2018. Accessed 28 June 2024.
Texas Education Agency. Special Education Strategic Plan. Texas Education Agency, 23 April 2018, https://tea.texas.gov/academics/special-student-populations/special-education/sped-strategic-plan-april-23-final.pdf. Accessed 28 June 2024.
Zirkel, Perry A. “THE AFTERMATH OF ENDREW F.: AN OUTCOMES ANALYSIS EIGHTEEN MONTHS LATER*.” Perry Zirkel, https://perryzirkel.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/zirkel-endrew-f.-article-iv.pdf. Accessed 1 July 2024.
