Assessment of U.S. State Compliance with Educational Mandates and Implications for Sustainable Development Goals

Executive Summary

A recent annual review by the U.S. Department of Education indicates a decline in state-level compliance with the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). The findings for the 2022-2023 school year reveal that a majority of states are failing to meet federal requirements for serving students with disabilities. This trend presents significant challenges to the United States’ progress toward achieving key Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), particularly SDG 4 (Quality Education) and SDG 10 (Reduced Inequalities).

Key Findings of the 2023 IDEA Determinations

The federal assessment categorizes each state’s performance in implementing IDEA for students aged 3 to 21. The results highlight a systemic issue requiring attention.

• Compliance Decline: Only 19 states achieved the “meets requirements” designation, a decrease from 20 in the previous year.
• Widespread Deficiency: 30 states were designated as “needs assistance.” Of these, all but three have failed to meet requirements for two or more consecutive years, triggering mandatory federal enforcement actions.
• Intensive Support Required: Washington, D.C. received a “needs intervention” designation, indicating more significant compliance failures.
• Early Intervention Programs: Performance in programs for children from birth through age 2 shows comparatively better outcomes, with 30 states and Washington, D.C. meeting requirements.

Challenges to Achieving SDG 4: Quality Education

The failure of most states to meet IDEA standards directly undermines the principles of SDG 4, which calls for inclusive and equitable quality education for all.

1. Violation of Target 4.5: This target aims to ensure equal access to all levels of education for persons with disabilities. With only 44% of students with disabilities residing in states that meet federal requirements, a significant portion of this vulnerable population is denied equal access.
2. Compromised Learning Environments (Target 4.a): The “needs assistance” designation implies that states are not adequately building and maintaining disability-sensitive and effective learning environments, a core component of Target 4.a.
3. Inconsistent Educational Quality: The wide disparity in compliance creates a fractured educational landscape where a child’s access to quality education is determined by geography, contrary to the universal aims of SDG 4.

Implications for SDG 10: Reduced Inequalities

The report’s findings illustrate a persistent gap in educational equity, a central concern of SDG 10.

• Exclusion of Vulnerable Groups (Target 10.2): Failure to provide adequate special education services actively hinders the social and economic inclusion of individuals with disabilities from an early age.
• Unequal Opportunity (Target 10.3): The non-compliance represents a failure to ensure equal opportunity and reduce inequalities of outcome, as states are not fully implementing the primary U.S. law designed to protect the educational rights of students with disabilities.

Institutional Accountability and SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions

The IDEA determination process is a mechanism for institutional accountability, aligning with SDG 16’s call for effective and transparent institutions. However, critiques of the process suggest areas for improvement.

• Critique of Methodology: The Advocacy Institute, a non-profit organization, notes that the current scoring system is flawed. Key concerns include that the process does not factor in student performance on state assessments and that the rank-ordering methodology makes it mathematically impossible for all states to achieve the “meets requirements” status.
• Enforcement and Transparency (Target 16.6): While the mandate for enforcement action against repeatedly non-compliant states supports institutional accountability, questions about the transparency and real-world impact of the evaluation metrics remain.

State-Level Performance Overview

States Designated as “Meets Requirements”

The following 19 states were found to be in compliance for the 2022-2023 school year:

• Connecticut
• Illinois
• Indiana
• Kansas
• Kentucky
• Massachusetts
• Maryland
• Minnesota
• Missouri
• North Dakota
• Nebraska
• New Hampshire
• New Jersey
• Ohio
• Pennsylvania
• Texas
• Virginia
• Wisconsin
• Wyoming

Of note, six states have maintained this top rating for the past 12 consecutive years: Kansas, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Missouri, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin.

SDGs Addressed in the Article

• SDG 4: Quality Education – The article focuses on the provision of education for students with disabilities, a core component of inclusive and equitable quality education.
• SDG 10: Reduced Inequalities – The article discusses the failure of many states to meet their legal obligations to serve students with disabilities, highlighting inequalities in educational access and opportunity for this group.

Specific SDG Targets Identified

• SDG 4: Quality Education

  • Target 4.5: By 2030, eliminate gender disparities in education and ensure equal access to all levels of education and vocational training for the vulnerable, including persons with disabilities, indigenous peoples and children in vulnerable situations.
    
    Explanation: The article is centered on the “Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA)” and the assessment of states’ performance in serving students with disabilities from ages 3 to 21, and a separate rating for children from birth through age 2. This directly relates to ensuring equal access to education for persons with disabilities.
  • Target 4.a: Build and upgrade education facilities that are child, disability and gender sensitive and provide safe, non-violent, inclusive and effective learning environments for all.
    
    Explanation: The article implies this target by discussing the need for states to meet their obligations in “serving students with disabilities.” When states fail and are labeled “needs assistance” or “needs intervention,” enforcement actions can include directing funds to “areas deemed inadequate,” which relates to improving the resources and environments for these students.

• SDG 10: Reduced Inequalities

  • Target 10.2: By 2030, empower and promote the social, economic and political inclusion of all, irrespective of age, sex, disability, race, ethnicity, origin, religion or economic or other status.
    
    Explanation: The article’s focus on providing education to students with disabilities is a fundamental aspect of promoting their social inclusion. The failure of states to meet requirements indicates a lack of progress in including this group fully and equitably.
  • Target 10.3: Ensure equal opportunity and reduce inequalities of outcome, including by eliminating discriminatory laws, policies and practices and promoting appropriate legislation, policies and action in this regard.
    
    Explanation: The article discusses the implementation and enforcement of a specific law, IDEA, which is designed to ensure equal educational opportunity. The annual review by the U.S. Department of Education is a mechanism to monitor the implementation of this policy and take action against states that fail to reduce inequalities of outcome for students with disabilities.

Indicators for Measuring Progress

• For Target 4.5 & 10.3

  • Indicator: The U.S. Department of Education’s annual determination of state compliance with the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA).
    
    Explanation: The article explicitly mentions this indicator, detailing the four categories states are assigned: “meets requirements, needs assistance, needs intervention or needs substantial intervention.” The number of states in each category is a direct measure of how well policies for inclusive education are being implemented. For example, the article states, “just 19 states qualify as ‘meets requirements’ for serving students with disabilities ages 3 to 21, down from 20 last year.”
  • Indicator: Percentage of students with disabilities in states that meet federal requirements.
    
    Explanation: The article provides a specific statistic that serves as an indicator of equal access and quality. It notes that “just 44% of students with disabilities are in states with a ‘meets requirements’ determination this year.” This figure quantifies the extent of the inequality in educational provision for this group.
  • Indicator: Number of states requiring enforcement action for consecutive years of non-compliance.
    
    Explanation: The article states that if states do not achieve “meets requirements” for two or more years, enforcement action is required. It notes that of the states labeled “needs assistance,” “all but three… qualified for that label for two or more years.” This serves as an indicator of persistent challenges in ensuring equal opportunity.

SDGs, Targets, and Indicators Analysis

Source: disabilityscoop.com