Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA): Issues Regarding "Full Funding" of Part B Grants to States

Publication Date: February 2001

Publisher: Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

Author(s):

Research Area: Education

Type:

Abstract:

The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) is the major federal statute that supports special education and related services for children with disabilities. As a condition of accepting IDEA funding, the Act requires that states and local educational agencies (LEAs) provide a free appropriate public education (FAPE) to each eligible child with a disability. Providing special education and related services can be expensive. When Congress enacted the predecessor legislation to IDEA in 1975, the assumption was that education for children with disabilities was, on average, twice as costly as education for nondisabled children. At that time, Congress authorized the federal government to pay up to 40% of each state's "excess cost" of educating children with disabilities. The federal share of the excess cost -- sometimes termed the IDEA "full-funding" amount -- is calculated by taking 40% of the national average per pupil expenditure (APPE) times the number of children served under the program in each state.

Although Congress in recent years has substantially increased IDEA funding (funding for Part B grants to states has more than doubled since FY1996), the current full-funding amount has never been achieved. As a result, some Members of Congress have pressed for the federal government to pay its "full share" of the costs of educating children with disabilities. Resolutions to this effect have been passed. Legislation has been proposed that would set specific authorization targets for achieving full funding in future years. Legislation has also been proposed that would make full funding mandatory.

This reports discusses some of the issues that could arise if full funding of IDEA were to be reached. For example, achieving full funding will require approximately $10 billion more than current Part B appropriations, and this amount is likely to grow substantially over time. Moreover, full funding could provide states and LEAs with incentives to "over identify" children with disabilities to maximize funding, which is an issue of congressional concern, although state and local administrators claim that increased funding is never an incentive for identifying disabilities.

In addition, full funding may produce funding inequities among states and LEAs. A reason for this is that full funding is based on a national average cost estimate while state costs are assumed to differ substantially. Similarly, an average cost estimate does not recognize that some types of disabilities are much more expensive to address than others, and the distribution of children with severe (and more expensive) disabilities may cluster in some areas that have outstanding medical facilities or exemplary programs for specific disabilities. The determination and distribution of a full funding amount is likely to under-compensate states and LEAs with higher costs and over-compensate those with lower costs. The report, which will not be updated, concludes with possible additions or alternatives to full funding, that might address congressional concerns.