HHS DEI - Teacher Resources

Teacher Resources

TEACHER RESOURCES

For General & Special Educators

ENDREW F. v. DOUGLAS COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT | 137 S. Ct. 988 (2017)

In nineteen eighty-two, the Supreme Court held in Board of Education v. Rowley that students with disabilities are entitled to a free appropriate public education. Thirty-five years later, the Supreme Court clarified the standard for determining whether a school enabled a student with disabilities to make appropriate educational progress in Endrew F. versus Douglas County School District.

Endrew F., a child with autism, attended school in the Douglas County School District, which provided Endrew with an individualized education program, or IEP. Endrew’s parents failed to see meaningful educational progress after fourth grade, and Endrew’s behavior began impeding his ability to learn within a general education classroom. However, the school district’s proposed IEP for fifth grade contained the same objectives from previous years. Endrew’s parents moved him from his public school to Firefly House, a specialized private school for children with autism. The private school designed and implemented strategies to address Endrew’s behavioral problems, allowing him to make significant academic progress. The public school district presented Endrew’s parents with a new IEP. However, the new IEP failed to include any meaningful changes or propose using any of the approaches that had supported Endrew’s progress at Firefly House.

Endrew’s parents filed a complaint for reimbursement for the Firefly House tuition under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, or IDEA. The state department of education denied the claim, and Endrew’s parents filed a lawsuit in federal court. The district court ruled that the school district satisfied the requirements of the IDEA because it held annual reviews of his IEP and because the IEP provided Endrew with some educational benefit. The Tenth Circuit affirmed, and the Supreme Court granted cert.

U.S. Supreme Court Decision

On March 22, 2017 the U.S. Supreme Court (sometimes referred to as Court) issued a unanimous opinion in Endrew F. v. Douglas County School District Re-1, 137 S. Ct. 988. In that case, the Court interpreted the scope of the free appropriate public education (FAPE) requirements in the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). The Court overturned the Tenth Circuit’s decision that Endrew, a child with autism, was only entitled to an educational program that was calculated to provide “merely more than de minimis” educational benefit. In rejecting the Tenth Circuit’s reasoning, the Supreme Court determined that, “[t]o meet its substantive obligation under the IDEA, a school must offer an IEP [individualized education program] that is reasonably calculated to enable a child to make progress appropriate in light of the child’s circumstances.” The Court additionally emphasized the requirement that “every child should have the chance to meet challenging objectives.”

The Endrew F. decision is important because it informs our efforts to improve academic outcomes for children with disabilities. To this end, the U.S. Department of Education (Department) is providing parents and other stakeholders information on the issues addressed in Endrew F. and the impact of the Court’s decision on the implementation of the IDEA. Because the decision in Endrew F. clarified the scope of the IDEA’s FAPE requirements, the Department’s Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services (OSERS) is interested in receiving comments from families, teachers, administrators, and other stakeholders to assist us in identifying implementation questions and best practices. If you are interested in commenting on this document or have additional questions, please send them to OSERS by email at EndrewF@ed.gov.

Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, U.S. Department of Education, September 7, 2022