OSEP Memorandum 95-9
U.S. Department of Education
November 23, 1994
Judith E. Heumann, Assistant Secretary Thomas Hehir, Director
• U.S. Department of Education, Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP)
• Least Restrictive Environment (LRE), Intent/Scope of LRE Requirement
• Least Restrictive Environment (LRE), Inclusion
Summary
The Department of Education issued a policy memorandum to chief state school officers
to provide them with guidance on the IDEA's LRE requirements.
(1) It explained that the LRE requirements of Part B refer to the provision which
states the IDEA's strong preference for educating students with disabilities in regular
classes with appropriate aids and supports, found in the statute at 20 USC 1412(5)(B) and
implemented by the Part B regulations at 34 CFR 300.550-300.556.
(2) The IDEA does not use the term "inclusion", and thus, the Department
of Education has not defined that term. What the IDEA does require is that districts place
students in the LRE, which is defined in the sections cited.
(3) In order to ensure placement in the LRE, IEP teams must consider the extent
that the student will be able to participate in regular education programs, and what range
of supplementary aids and services would facilitate the student's placement in that
environment.
(4) The IDEA
contains no definition of the term "supplementary aids and services", but if
the IEP team determines that such services are necessary, then they must be described in
the student's IEP and provided to the student.
(5) At a minimum, the IDEA requires that each disabled student's placement be
determined annually. However, the student's parent, teacher, or other service provider can
initiate a request for review of the student's IEP at any point in time.
(6) The lack of adequate personnel or resources cannot be used as an
excuse by the district to relieve them of their obligations to make FAPE available to
disabled students in the LRE. The public agency must ensure the supply of a sufficient
number of teachers who are qualified, with the needed aids and supports to provide such
services in regular education environments.
(7) If it is determined that a student with disabilities cannot be educated
satisfactorily in regular education even with supplementary aids and services, then the
student's placement team must select the option on the "continuum" of
alternative placements which best meets the student's needs. The alternative placement
chosen must maximize opportunities for the student to interact with non-disabled peers to
the extent appropriate.
(8) Although the overriding consideration in determining an appropriate placement
is the individual abilities and needs of the student, other relevant factors include a
comparison of the educational benefits available in the regular classroom with
supplemental aids to the educational benefits available in a special education classroom,
the non-academic benefits of interaction with non-disabled students, and the degree of
disruption to other students which results in the inability to meet the student's needs.
The Department instructed that districts cannot make placements based solely on the
following factors: category of disability, severity of disability, configuration of
delivery system, availability of educational or related services, availability of space,
or administrative convenience.
(9) Concerning the impact that a disabled student's placement can have on
non-disabled students, the Department remarked that if a student is so disruptive in the
regular classroom that the education of other students is significantly impaired, then the
needs of the disabled student cannot be met in that environment. Nonetheless, the district
must ensure that consideration is given to the full range of supplementary aids and
services that could accommodate the student in that setting prior to making such a
determination.
(10) The Department supports a variety of professional development and training
projects that address the needs of students in inclusive programs and has financed
Statewide Systems Change projects which support changing the setting for delivery of
educational services from separate settings to general education settings.
Introduction
The least restrictive environment (LRE) requirements of Part B of the Individuals
with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) have been included in the law in their present form
since 1975. However, these requirements continue to generate complex and interesting
questions from the field. In particular, questions have been raised about the relationship
of IDEA's LRE requirements to "inclusion." Consistent with our attempt to
provide you and your staff with as much current information as possible and to ensure that
the applicable requirements of IDEA that govern the education of students with
disabilities are accurately understood and properly implemented, guidance on IDEA's LRE
requirements is being provided in a question and answer format. In most cases, this
question and answer document consolidates the prior policy guidance that the Department
has provided in this area. We encourage you to disseminate this document to a wide range
of individuals and organizations throughout your State. Any further questions should be
directed to the contact person named at the beginning of this document or to Dr. JoLeta
Reynolds at (202) 205-5507.
We hope that the above questions and answers are of assistance to you and your
staff as you carry out your responsibilities to ensure that disabled students are provided
a free appropriate public education in the least restrictive environment.
Questions and Answers
1. What are the least restrictive Environment (LRE) requirements of Part B
of IDEA?
ANSWER:
In order to be eligible to receive funds under Part B of IDEA (IDEA), States must,
among other conditions, assure that a free appropriate public education (FAPE) is made
available to all children with specified disabilities in mandated age ranges. The term
"FAPE" is defined as including, among other elements, special education and
related services, provided at no cost to parents, in conformity with an individualized
education program (IEP). The IEP, which contains the statement of the special education
and related services to meet each disabled student's unique needs, forms the basis for the
entitlement of each student with a disability to an individualized and appropriate
education. IDEA further provides that States must have in place procedures assuring that,
"to the maximum extent appropriate, children with disabilities, including children in
public or private institutions or other care facilities, are educated with children who
are not disabled, and that special classes, separate schooling, or other removal of
children with disabilities from the regular educational environment occurs only when the
nature or severity of the disability is such that education in regular classes with the
use of supplementary aids and services cannot be achieved satisfactorily." This
provision, which states IDEA's strong preference for educating students with disabilities
in regular classes with appropriate aids and supports, is found in the statute at 20
U.S.C. § 1412(5)(B) and is implemented by the Department's regulations at 34 CFR §§
300.550-300.556. Copies of the relevant statutory and regulatory provisions are attached
to this question and answer document. [OMITTED]
2. Does IDEA define the term "inclusion?"
ANSWER:
IDEA does not use the term "inclusion"; consequently, the Department of
Education has not defined that term. However, IDEA does require school districts to place
students in the LRE. LRE means that, to the maximum extent appropriate, school districts
must educate students with disabilities in the regular classroom with appropriate aids and
supports, referred to as "supplementary aids and services," along with their
non-disabled peers in the school they would attend if not disabled, unless a student's IEP
requires some other arrangement. This requires an individualized inquiry into the unique
educational needs of each disabled student in determining the possible range of aids and
supports that are needed to facilitate the student's placement in the regular educational
environment before a more restrictive placement is considered.
In implementing IDEA's LRE provisions, the regular classroom in the school the
student would attend if not disabled is the first placement option considered for each
disabled student before a more restrictive placement is considered. If the IEP of a
student with a disability can be implemented satisfactorily with the provision of
supplementary aids and services in the regular classroom in the school the student would
attend if not disabled, that placement is the LRE placement for that student. However, if
the student's IEP cannot be implemented satisfactorily in that environment, even with the
provision of supplementary aids and services, the regular classroom in the school the
student would attend if not disabled is not the LRE placement for that student.
3. How can IDEA requirements be implemented to ensure that consideration is given
to whether a student with a disability can be educated in the regular educational
environment with the use of supplementary aids and services before a more restrictive
placement is considered?
ANSWER:
The relationship of IDEA's LRE requirements to the IEP process is key, since under
IDEA, the student's IEP forms the basis for the student's placement decision. IDEA
requires that the IEP of each disabled student must contain, among other components, a
"statement of the specific special education and related services to be provided to
the child and the extent that the child will be able to participate in regular educational
programs." 34 CFR § 300.346(a)(3). At the student's IEP meeting, the extent that the
student will be able to participate in regular educational programs is one of the matters
to be addressed by all of the participants on the student's IEP team before the student's
IEP is finalized. In addressing this issue, the team must consider the range of
supplementary aids and services, in light of the student's abilities and needs, that would
facilitate the student's placement in the regular educational environment. As discussed in
question 4 below, these supplementary aids and services must be described in the student's
IEP. Appendix C to 34 CFR Part 300 (question 48).
4. Does IDEA define the term "supplementary aids and services?"
ANSWER:
No. However, in determining the educational placement for each disabled student, the
first line of inquiry is whether the student's IEP can be implemented satisfactorily in
the regular educational environment with the provision of supplementary aids and services.
This requirement has been in effect since 1975 when the Education of the Handicapped Act
(EHA), the predecessor to the IDEA, originally became law. Consistent with this
requirement, any modifications to the regular educational program, i.e., supplementary
aids and services that the IEP team determines that the student needs to facilitate the
student's placement in the regular educational environment must be described in the
student's IEP and must be provided to the student. Appendix C to 34 CFR Part 300 (question
48). While determinations of what supplementary aids and services are appropriate for a
particular student must be made on an individual basis, some supplementary aids and
services that educators have used successfully include modifications to the regular class
curriculum, assistance of an itinerant teacher with special education training, special
education training for the regular teacher, use of computer-assisted devices, provision of
notetakers, and use of a resource room, to mention a few.
5. How frequently must a disabled student's placement be reviewed under
IDEA?
ANSWER:
Under IDEA, each disabled student's placement must be determined at least annually,
must be based on the student's IEP, and must be in the school or facility as close as
possible to the student's home. Under IDEA, each student's placement decision must be made
by a group of persons, including persons knowledgeable about the student, the meaning of
evaluation data, and the placement options. While the student's IEP forms the basis for
the placement decision, a student's IEP cannot be revised without holding another IEP
meeting, which the school district is responsible for convening. If either the student's
parent or teacher or other service provider wishes to initiate review of the student's IEP
at a point during the school year that does not correspond with the annual IEP review,
that individual can request the school district to hold another IEP meeting. If the IEP is
revised, following the meeting, the placement team would need to review the student's IEP
to determine if a change in placement would be needed to reflect the revised IEP.
6. If a determination is made that a student with disability can be educated in
regular classes with the provision of supplementary aids and services, can school
districts refuse to implement the student's IEP in a specific class because of the
unwillingness of a particular teacher to educate that student in his or her classroom or
the teacher's assertion that he or she lacks adequate training to educate that student
effectively?
ANSWER:
Under IDEA, lack of adequate personnel or resources does not relieve school districts
of their obligations to make FAPE available to each disabled student in the least
restrictive educational setting in which his or her IEP can be implemented. Exclusion of a
student from an appropriate placement based solely on the student's disability is
prohibited by Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973. However, placement in a
particular regular class based on the qualifications of a particular teacher is
permissible under both statutes. The public agency has an affirmative responsibility to
ensure the supply of sufficient numbers of teachers who are qualified, with needed aids
and supports, to provide services to students with disabilities in regular educational
environments, and to provide necessary training and support services to students with
disabilities. The Department encourages States and school districts to develop innovative
approaches to address issues surrounding resource availability. Factors that could be
examined include cooperative learning, teaching styles, physical arrangements of the
classroom, curriculum modifications, peer mediated supports, and equipment, to mention a
few.
7. Once a determination is made that a disabled student cannot be educated
satisfactorily in the regular educational environment, even with the provision of
supplementary aids and services, what considerations govern placement?
ANSWER:
IDEA does not require that every student with a disability be placed in the regular
classroom regardless of individual abilities and needs. This recognition that regular
class placement may not be appropriate for every disabled student is reflected in the
requirement that school districts make available a range of placement options, known as a
continuum of alternative placements, to meet the unique educational needs of students with
disabilities. This requirement for the continuum reinforces the importance of the
individualized inquiry, not a "one size fits all" approach, in determining what
placement is the LRE for each student with a disability. The options an this continuum
must include "the alternative placements listed in the definition of special
education under § 300.17 (instruction in regular classes, special classes, special
schools, home instruction, and instruction in hospitals and institutions)." 34 CFR §
300.551(b)(1). These options must be available to the extent necessary to implement the
IEP of each disabled student. The placement team must select the option on the continuum
in which it determines that the student's IEP can be implemented. Any alternative
placement selected for the student outside of the regular educational environment must
maximize opportunities for the student to interact with non-disabled peers, to the extent
appropriate to the needs of the student.
It also should be noted that under IDEA, parents must be given written prior notice
that meets the requirements of § 300.505 a reasonable time before a public agency
implements a proposal or refusal to initiate or change the identification, evaluation, or
educational placement of the child, or the provision of FAPE to the child. Consistent with
this notice requirement, parents of disabled students must be informed that the public
agency is required to have a full continuum of placement options, as well as about the
placement options that were actually considered and the reasons why those options were
rejected. 34 CFR §§ 300.504-300.505; Notice of Policy Guidance on Deaf Students
Education Services, published at 57 Fed. Reg. 49274 (Oct. 30, 1992).
8. What are the permissible factors that must be considered in determining what
placement is appropriate for a student with a disability? Which factors, if any, may not
be considered?
ANSWER:
The overriding rule in placement is that each student's placement must be
individually-determined based on the individual student's abilities and needs. As noted
previously, it is the program of specialized instruction and related services contained in
the student's IEP that forms the basis for the placement decision. In determining if a
placement is appropriate under IDEA, the following factors are relevant: the educational
benefits available to the disabled student in a traditional classroom, supplemented with
appropriate aids and services, in comparison to the educational benefits to the disabled
student from a special education classroom; the non-academic benefits to the disabled
student from interacting with non-disabled students; and the degree of disruption of the
education of other students, resulting in the inability to meet the unique needs of the
disabled student. However, school districts may not make placements based solely on
factors such as the following: category of disability; severity of disability;
configuration of delivery system; availability of educational or related services;
availability of space; or administrative convenience.
9. To what extent is it permissible under IDEA for school districts to consider the
impact of a regular classroom placement on those students in the classroom who do not have
a disability?
ANSWER:
IDEA regulations provide that in selecting the LRE, consideration is given to any
potential harmful effect on the student or on the quality of services that the student
needs. If a student with a disability has behavioral problems that are so disruptive in a
regular classroom that the education of other students is significantly impaired, the
needs of the disabled student cannot be met in that environment. However, before making
such a determination, school districts must ensure that consideration has been given to
the full range of supplementary aids and services that could be provided to the student in
the regular educational environment to accommodate the unique needs of the disabled
student. If the placement team determines that even with the provision of supplementary
aids and services, that student's IEP could not be implemented satisfactorily in the
regular educational environment, that placement would not be the LRE placement for that
student at that particular time, because her or his unique educational needs could not be
met in that setting.
While IDEA regulations permit consideration of the effect of the placement of a
disabled student in a regular classroom on other students in that classroom, selected
findings from Federally-funded research projects indicate that: (1) achievement test
performance among students who were classmates of students with significant disabilities
were equivalent or better than a comparison group (Salisbury, 1993); (2) students
developed more positive attitudes towards peers with disabilities (CRI, 1992); and (3)
self concept, social skills, and problem solving skills improved for all students in
inclusive settings (Peck, Donaldson, & Pezzoli, 1990, Salisbury & Palombaro,
1993).1
10. Are there any resources that the Department is aware of that have proven
helpful to educators and paraprofessionals in implementing inclusive educational programs?
ANSWER:
The Department has supported a variety of professional development and training
projects (e.g., preservice, inservice, school restructuring projects) that address the
needs of students with disabilities in inclusive educational programs. In addition, the
Department has financed Statewide Systems Change projects which support changing the
setting for delivery of educational services from separate settings to general education
settings in the school that the student would attend if not disabled. Numerous materials
and products have been developed by these projects which have focused on strategies that
support collaborative planning and problem solving, site based control, curriculum and
technological adaptations and modifications, parent and family involvement, and the
creative use of human and fiscal resources. These projects have underscored the importance
of timely access to resources (e.g., people, materials, information, technology) when they
are needed.
Educators can obtain further information regarding these programs by contacting:
National Information Center for
Children and Youth with Disabilities
P.O. Box 1492
Washington, D.C. 20013-1492
Telephone: 1-800-695-0285
(Deaf and hearing-impaired individuals may
also call this number for TDD services)
Consortium on Inclusive Schooling Practices
Allegheny Singer Research Institute
320 E. North Avenue
Pittsburgh, PA. 15212
Telephone: (412) 359-1600
(Deaf and hearing-impaired individuals may also
call the Pennsylvania Relay Service number at
1-(800)-654-5984)
California Research Institute
on the Integration of Students with Severe
Disabilities
San Francisco State University
1415 Tapia Drive
San Francisco, California 94132
Telephone: (415) 338-7847-48
(Deaf and hearing-impaired individuals may also
call the California Relay Service number at
1-(800)-735-2922)
1 California Research Institute. (1992). Educational practices in integrated
settings associated with positive student outcomes. Strategies on the Inclusion on the
Integration of Students with Severe Disabilities, 3, (3), 7,10. San Francisco State
University. San Francisco, California.
Peck C. A., Donaldson, J., & Pezzoli, M. (1990). Some benefits non-handicapped
adolescents perceive for themselves from their social relationships with peers who have
severe disabilities. Journal of the Association for Persons with Severe Handicaps, 15(4),
241-249.
Salisbury, C. L. (1993, November). Effects of inclusive schooling practices: Costs
to kids and organizations. Presentation at the 1993 Conference of the Association for
Persons with Severe Handicaps, Chicago, Illinois.
Salisbury, C. L., a Palombaro, M. M. (Eds.) (1993). "No problem." Working
things out our way. State University of New York-Binghamton,Binghamton, New York.
