Report on the Jeopardized Status of Special Education and its Implications for Sustainable Development Goals

Introduction: A Threat to Inclusive Education and Equality

Recent administrative actions at the U.S. Department of Education’s Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services (OSERS), specifically the mass firing of its staff, present a significant threat to the advancement of several Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). This report analyzes the potential consequences of dismantling OSERS, with a primary focus on SDG 4 (Quality Education), SDG 10 (Reduced Inequalities), and SDG 16 (Peace, Justice, and Strong Institutions). The office’s role in ensuring a “free and appropriate public education” for over 7.5 million students with disabilities is fundamental to upholding these global commitments.

Impact on Sustainable Development Goal 4: Quality Education

Ensuring Inclusive and Equitable Education for Vulnerable Children

The core mission of OSERS is directly aligned with SDG Target 4.5, which aims to ensure equal access to all levels of education for persons with disabilities. The office oversees the implementation of federal laws that mandate educational access and support for students with disabilities. Without this federal oversight, progress toward creating inclusive and effective learning environments as stipulated in SDG Target 4.a is at risk. The potential for states to fall out of compliance with these foundational laws could reverse decades of progress in providing quality education for this vulnerable population.

Disruption to Essential Funding and Early Intervention Services

OSERS is responsible for administering critical financial resources that enable states to meet their obligations under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). Key funding streams at risk include:

• Over $15 billion in annual IDEA funding distributed to states to cover the costs of special education services.
• $540 million allocated for early intervention programs for children from birth to age 3, which provide services like speech and physical therapy to children with developmental delays. These programs, which served 4 percent of infants and toddlers in 2023, are vital for achieving long-term educational success and well-being, a cornerstone of SDG 4.

The potential elimination of OSERS staff creates uncertainty regarding the distribution of these funds, thereby jeopardizing the services that help children with disabilities succeed in school and life.

Implications for Sustainable Development Goal 10: Reduced Inequalities

Erosion of Civil Rights and Increased Barriers for Persons with Disabilities

The work of OSERS is a practical application of SDG 10, which calls for the reduction of inequalities and the social and political inclusion of all, including persons with disabilities. Historically, children with disabilities were often excluded from public education. Federal laws like the Rehabilitation Act and IDEA, which OSERS helps enforce, were landmark achievements in reducing these inequalities. The weakening of OSERS threatens to re-establish barriers to education and other essential services, undermining SDG Target 10.3, which seeks to eliminate discriminatory laws, policies, and practices.

Disproportionate Impact on Disadvantaged Families

OSERS provides a crucial recourse for parents who believe their child’s rights are being violated. With the concurrent reduction of staff at the Department of Education’s civil rights division, families may be left with legal action as their only option. This situation would disproportionately disadvantage families lacking the financial resources to hire private attorneys, thereby exacerbating inequalities and contradicting the principles of SDG 10.

Undermining Sustainable Development Goal 16: Peace, Justice, and Strong Institutions

Weakening of Institutional Accountability and Oversight

SDG 16 emphasizes the need for effective, accountable, and transparent institutions. OSERS functions as a key accountability mechanism, monitoring states to ensure they comply with federal disability rights laws. Its responsibilities include:

1. Reviewing annual state plans for the use of IDEA funds.
2. Collecting and analyzing student data to monitor compliance.
3. Conducting investigations when states are believed to be out of compliance.

The removal of OSERS staff effectively dismantles this institutional framework, weakening the enforcement of non-discriminatory laws and policies as promoted by SDG Target 16.b and undermining the development of strong institutions.

Recommendations for Upholding SDG Commitments at State and Local Levels

Strategies to Mitigate the Absence of Federal Oversight

In the event that the reduction in force at OSERS proceeds, state and local policymakers, in partnership with non-governmental organizations, must take action to uphold commitments to the SDGs. Recommended strategies include:

• Increase State Capacity: Enhance state-level resources to field calls from families and provide guidance on their educational rights.
• Strengthen Funding: Create or expand dedicated state funding streams for special education to ensure districts have the resources to provide necessary services.
• Maintain Data and Monitoring: Continue the collection and analysis of critical data on students with disabilities to monitor school district compliance with federal law.
• Foster Partnerships: Collaborate with local advocacy organizations and nonprofits to identify and address gaps in services and disseminate information to parents.
• Form Interstate Alliances: Create consortiums with other states to pool resources and maintain accountability standards in the absence of federal oversight.

Analysis of Sustainable Development Goals in the Article

1. Which SDGs are addressed or connected to the issues highlighted in the article?

1. SDG 4: Quality Education

   • The article’s central theme is the right to a “free and appropriate public education” for over 7.5 million students with disabilities in the US. It discusses the role of the Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services (OSERS) in ensuring these students receive necessary services, from early childhood intervention to postsecondary education.

2. SDG 10: Reduced Inequalities

   • The article explicitly addresses the historical and ongoing discrimination against people with disabilities. It notes that before federal laws, disabled children were “denied access to public schools” and continue to face “barriers to accessing the basic services and supports they need.” The potential dismantling of OSERS threatens to widen these inequalities by removing a key mechanism for protecting their rights.

3. SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions

   • The article focuses on the function and potential collapse of a key government institution, OSERS, which is responsible for accountability, oversight, and ensuring states comply with federal disability rights laws. The threat to OSERS is a direct challenge to having “effective, accountable and transparent institutions.” It also discusses access to justice, as the office provides recourse for parents, whose only alternative might become costly legal action.

2. What specific targets under those SDGs can be identified based on the article’s content?

1. SDG 4: Quality Education

   • Target 4.2: By 2030, ensure that all girls and boys have access to quality early childhood development, care and pre-primary education.
     • The article highlights that OSERS funds and supports services for “young children with disabilities,” including “$540 million for early intervention for children from birth to age 3” to help them succeed in school.
   • 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.
     • This is the core target addressed. The entire article is about ensuring students with disabilities—a vulnerable group—have their right to education upheld and are not denied services they are “entitled to.”
   • 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.
     • The article mentions OSERS’s role in funding services like “assistive technology” and ensuring students are in the “least restrictive environment,” which are crucial components of creating inclusive and effective learning environments for disabled students.

2. 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.
     • The article frames the issue as a civil right, noting that before legal protections, disabled people were “excluded from society.” The work of OSERS is a direct effort to promote the inclusion of disabled children in mainstream education.
   • 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.
     • The article discusses the importance of federal laws like the “Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA)” and “Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act,” which were created to eliminate discrimination and guarantee equal educational opportunities. OSERS’s function is to ensure these laws are implemented.

3. SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions

   • Target 16.3: Promote the rule of law at the national and international levels and ensure equal access to justice for all.
     • The article explains that OSERS provides a mechanism for justice when parents are “concerned their child’s school may not be providing the services they’re entitled to under federal law.” Without this institutional support, families’ “only recourse would be legal action,” which disproportionately harms those unable to afford private attorneys, thus impeding equal access to justice.
   • Target 16.6: Develop effective, accountable and transparent institutions at all levels.
     • The article details how OSERS functions as an accountable institution by administering “$15 billion in IDEA funding” and “monitoring states’ compliance with IDEA” through data analysis and investigations. The firing of its staff is presented as a direct threat to its effectiveness and accountability.

3. Are there any indicators mentioned or implied in the article that can be used to measure progress towards the identified targets?

1. For SDG 4 (Quality Education)

   • Participation Rate in Early Childhood Education: The article provides a direct statistic: “In 2023, early intervention programs served 4 percent of infants and toddlers nationally.” This can be used to measure progress toward Target 4.2.
   • Data on Educational Inclusion and Outcomes: The article states that states must report student data to OSERS, and it suggests that policymakers should continue to collect “critical data on disabled students, such as graduation rates and school discipline rates.” These are direct indicators for measuring equal access and outcomes under Target 4.5.
   • Number of Students Receiving Services: The article mentions that OSERS serves “more than 7.5 million prekindergarten–grade 12 students with disabilities,” which is a baseline indicator of the scope of special education services.

2. For SDG 10 (Reduced Inequalities)

   • Existence and Enforcement of Anti-Discrimination Laws: The article’s emphasis on the “Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA)” and “Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act” implies that the existence and, crucially, the enforcement of such legislation are key indicators of progress toward Target 10.3. The oversight function of OSERS is the mechanism for this enforcement.

3. For SDG 16 (Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions)

   • Institutional Capacity for Oversight: The article implies that the number of staff and the budget of institutions like OSERS are indicators of their capacity to be effective and accountable (Target 16.6). The threat of firing “almost all employees” is a negative indicator of this capacity.
   • Accessibility of Grievance Mechanisms: The fact that OSERS “receives calls directly from parents” serves as an indicator of an accessible justice mechanism (Target 16.3). A decline in the institution’s ability to field these calls would indicate reduced access to justice for families.

4. Table of SDGs, Targets, and Indicators

Source: urban.org