Significant Disproportionality: Identification, Placement, and Discipline

What is Significant Disproportionality?

Disproportionality is an overrepresentation of students from a racial group in:

• identification for special education, including within specific disability categories;

• placement in more restrictive educational settings; and

• disciplinary actions, including in- and out-of-school suspensions and expulsions.

  • All students are included in the calculations for Identification, while only students with disabilities are considered in Placement and Discipline calculations.

Disproportionality becomes significant when the overrepresentation exceeds a threshold defined by each state, with input from stakeholders. In Ohio, districts are identified as having significant disproportionality if their risk ratio in a given category is greater than 2.50 for three consecutive years.

Disproportionate Representation 

What is Disproportionate Representation?

• Disproportionate representation is an overrepresentation of students from a racial group in identification for special education, including within specific disability categories.

• All students are included in the calculations for disproportionate representation.

• In Ohio, districts are identified as having disproportionate representation if their risk ratio in a given category is greater than 2.50 for three consecutive years

• Districts identified with disproportionate representation must:

  • review their policies, procedures, and practices and submit documentation to the Department of Education and Workforce; and

  • identify and address the factors that may be contributing to the disproportionate representation.

How is Disproportionate Representation Different from Significant Disproportionality?

• Disproportionate representation (Indicators 9 & 10) (20 U.S.C. 1416(a)(3)(c)) and significant disproportionality in special education identification (20 U.S.C. 1418(d) and 34 §§ CFR 300.646-647) represent two distinct IDEA requirements around equity.

• The differences between these two federal requirements are:

  • Significant disproportionality in special education identification must include students ages 3 through 21, while disproportionate representation (Indicators 9 & 10) must include only students age 5 and in kindergarten through age 21.

  • Methodology for significant disproportionality in special education identification may consider reasonable progress, while reasonable progress is not presented as an option for disproportionate representation (Indicators 9 & 10).

  • Unlike significant disproportionality, disproportionate representation (Indicators 9 & 10) does not require districts or community schools to redirect funds.

• Ohio’s methodology for disproportionate representation (Indicators 9 & 10) and significant disproportionality are otherwise the same, in that the calculation is based on:

  • Regular and alternate risk ratios;

  • A risk ratio threshold of 2.50;

  • 3 consecutive years of data;

  • A minimum cell size of 10; and

  • A minimum n-size of 30.

Generally, Indicators 9 and 10 and Significant Disproportionality and  Disproportionate Representation are reviewed together and are intertwined.  All presentations, recordings, and resources for these indicators will be displayed together on this page

For the Dispro Indicators, districts have several actions. They are required to correct any noncompliant records, complete an SRSR and IP and allocate funds to address the identified needs except for Disproportionate Representation which does not require a redirection of funds

Indicators 9&10 and  Significant Disproportionality are considered  Dispro indicators. When a district has been identified with a risk ratio above the 2.5  threshold for three years, they are noncompliant and are required to correct the noncompliant records, and complete an SRSR and an Improvement Plan  (Due: 3-29-24). 

LEAs may also need to submit 5 unique records for EACH flagged indicator from the OEC identified Student Records for Review document in the Profile. If LEAs had this same finding last year and demonstrate systemic correction based on last year's findings they will not be required to complete another record review this year.  (Due: 2-23-24 )

If the district is proposing it has been flagged for the indicator due to incorrectly reported data, they will complete the Data Reporting Error Verification Form.  The district will also list each State Student Identification (SSID) number listed on the Records for Review Excel spreadsheet for Indicators 9 and 10 and Dispro on the Student Records Submission Form (Due: 2-23-24).