The Individual with Disability Educational Improvement Act (IDEA-2004) (P.L.
108-446) includes a policy called Early Intervening Services (EIS) which makes it
permissible, but not mandatory, for a school district to use 15 percent of their IDEA Part
B funds to provide services to non-disabled at risk students. However, a school district
cited for disproportionality because of an overrepresentation of racial or ethnic minorities
or second language learners receiving special education services or disciplinary action is
required to use 15 percent of their special education funding to address these issues.
The purpose of this study was to obtain knowledge on the impact of this IDEA
policy at the local public school district level on the overidentification of students in
general and specifically on the overrepresentation of African Americans in special
education services. The design of the study utilized parallel case studies in six Northeast
Ohio school districts. Three of these districts were cited for disproportionality and three
districts were not cited for disproportionality. The design relied on two interviews in each
district. Additional data was obtained from reviews of federal, state and school district
records and relevant secondary sources.
Four policy themes emerged from the Study: EIS policy was confusing because it
lacked clarity on how disproportionality was determined; funding was punitive because it
reduced funds for students with disabilities to provide interventions for general education
vi
students; implementation was unfair because some districts were required to establish
EIS services and some were not; and the additional workload created for administrators
was excessive. The three districts that used EIS funding to address a disproportionate
number of African American students assigned to special education categories showed a
reduction in disproportionality and were not cited after a year of EIS. However, the cause
of this success was questioned because the benchmark for determining disproportionality
was raised. All of the districts thought EIS could reduce overidentification, but only one
reported a reduction of special educations students.