Revised 8/08
The Educational Benefit
Review Process
A Process for Reflection on the Quality of IEPs
ctserc.org
25 Industrial Park Road, Middletown, CT 06457-1520 · (860) 632-1485
Revised 8/08
The intent of a “Free Appropriate Public Education” (FAPE) for individuals with disabilities is to design
individualized instruction with sufficient supports and services needed to enable the student to receive educational
benefit. The Educational Benefit Review Process has been developed by the California Department Education to
examine how districts provide supports and services that result in educational benefit. This process will assist
educators and families in examining the characteristics of IEPs that increase student access, participation, and
progress in general education by providing an appropriate education. The purpose of the Educational Benefit Review
Process is to determine whether the design of the IEP was reasonably calculated for the student to receive educational
benefit (Evaluation of California Educational Benefit Review Process, 2004).
Outcomes:
Participants will:
o Describe what constitutes “educational benefit” for a student with a disability; and
o Determine if the design of a student’s Individualized Education Program (IEP) was reasonably calculated to
increase the likelihood of the student obtaining educational benefit.
Essential Question for Learning:
o How can the development of an IEP be reasonably calculated to increase the likelihood of the student achieving
educational benefit?
SERC
2
Revised 8/08
Background:
The U.S. Supreme Court in Board of Education v. Rowley (1982) defined a two pronged test to determine if an IEP
has been appropriately developed. The two prongs are:
1) Does the IEP meet procedural compliance (Procedural Prong)? and
2) Was the IEP reasonably calculated to enable the child to receive educational benefit (Substantive Prong)?
Reasonable calculation –The Procedural Prong (not an exhaustive list)
 Procedural requirements of IDEA 2004;
 The IEP team identified needs related to:
o The child’s disability and
o Involvement and progress in the general curriculum;
 Goals and objectives/benchmarks established in each need area;
 Services planned to support:
o Progress toward all goals,
o Progress in the general curriculum,
o Participation in extracurricular and other nonacademic activities, and
o Education with other disabled and non-disabled children. (Drouin, 2004)
Educational benefit –The Substantive Prong (not an exhaustive list)
 Passing marks/grades;
 Advancement from grade to grade;
 Progress toward goals and objectives;
 Improved scores on district/statewide assessments/alternate assessment; and
 Passing the high school exit exam. (Rowley)
Additional federal district court decisions have expanded what constitutes educational benefit (Bearden, 2005):
o Mather v. Hartford (1996): grades, socialization skills, level of participation, consistency of effort
o Cypress-Fairbanks v. Michael F. (1997): positive academic and nonacademic benefits
SERC
3
Revised 8/08
The Educational Benefit Review Process takes approximately 2 to 3 hours to complete. Districts or schools
should select records of students who have been in the district for three years or more. Selected student files should
be a general representation of the kinds of IEPs that the district or school develops. It has been determined that it is
not necessary to review more than 5 files to discover patterns in IEP development across a district. The district
should assemble a team comprising administrators, general educators, special educators, integrated student support
services personnel, and other individuals who participate in the development of IEPs, such as families and
paraprofessionals. The process is intended to be reflective rather than evaluative. There should a method or protocol
to capture the dialogue that occurs during the process (Evaluation of California Educational Benefit Review Process, 2004).
The Components of the Educational Benefit Review Process:





SERC
Reviewing IEP documentation for a 3-year cycle;
Analyzing the relationship among needs, goals, and services;
Comparing progress across annuals;
Reviewing for quality in the planning process; and
Determining if the IEP was reasonably planned to receive educational benefit
(Drouin, 2004).
4
Revised 8/08
Steps for the Process

STEP 1 Record Information-What information is included in the student's IEP?
Chart what is recorded in each IEP about the student’s strengths, needs, goals and objectives, accommodations
and modifications, services/placement, and progress for the annual reviews in a three-year cycle.

STEP 2 Analyze Relationships-Is there a clear relationship between the identified needs, goals, and services?
Analyze the relationship and alignment among the student’s identified needs, goals, and services and how they
result in progress for annual review in a three-year cycle.

STEP 3 Compare to Prior Year-Are subsequent goals and services/placement consistent with progress made?
Compare progress from year 1 to year 2 and year 2 to year 3 to determine if subsequent changes to goals and
services were made based on the results of progress.

STEP 4 Review of Quality-Does the IEP reflect quality use of specially designed instruction?
Review the selection of accommodations and modifications and reflect on how the goals and objectives were
written for specific quality indicators.

STEP 5 Discuss Overall Educational Benefit-Are there any patterns to the program planned for the student?
Was the student's program reasonably planned to result in educational benefit?
Determine if there are any patterns in the IEP and decide if the IEP was reasonably planned to result in
educational benefit.
(Youtsey, 2006)
SERC
5
Revised 8/08
STEP 1
Record Information-What information is included in the student's IEP?
Chart what is recorded in each IEP about the student’s strengths, needs, impact statements, goals and objectives,
accommodations and modifications, services/placement, and progress for the annual reviews in a three-year cycle.
Be sure to include the student’s strengths under the Present Level of Achievement/Function.

Divide the work among the team members by disseminating the different annual reviews; look for the following
information:
 Present Level of Performance, Concerns, Impact Statements (pp. 4-5)
 Goals & Objectives, Accommodations & Modifications (pp. 7 & 8)
 Services (p. 11)
 Progress made on annual goals (p. 7) and (pp. 4-5 of the next IEP)

Using the chart to record what is written on each IEP
Important Guidelines
 Information must be present in the IEP
 Information is verbatim as much as possible
 Short-hand and abbreviations are acceptable, but paraphrasing or summarizing are not
SERC
6
Revised 8/08
STEP 2
Analyze Relationships-Is there a clear relationship between the identified needs, goals, and services?
Analyze the relationship and alignment between the student’s identified needs, goals, and services and how they
result in progress for annual review in a three-year cycle. Alignment is the direct relationship between two
components and is demonstrated by drawing a line from one area to another to show the association. For example,
the analysis of the assessments used in determining the present level of achievement/function will identify the
student’s specific needs; the identified needs will drive specific goals/objectives and accommodations and
modifications; and the goals/objectives and accommodations and modifications will drive the type and amount of
services and placement.

Working together as a team, select
 A Facilitator – someone to keep the group focused on the task
 A Recorder – someone to draw the circles and arrows to demonstrate the alignment

Examine each IEP and to determine group consensus regarding the alignment among the components
 Draw circles and arrows to designate alignment
 Draw empty circles to designate areas where alignment has not occurred or gaps in the alignment
Guiding Questions
 What assessment information provides information on the need/concern?
 How does the need/concern impact the student’s participations and progress in general
education curriculum?
 Which goals, objectives, accommodations, modifications directly address this impact?
 Which services and placement support the implementation of the goals, objectives,
accommodations, modifications?
 What progress was made as a result of the supports and services?
SERC
7
Revised 8/08
STEP 3
Compare to Prior Year-Are subsequent goals and services/placement consistent with progress made?
Compare progress from year 1 to year 2 and year 2 to year 3 to determine if subsequent changes to goals and
services were made based on the results of progress.

Working together as a team, select
 A Facilitator – someone to keep the group focused on the task
 A Recorder – someone to record 0, +, or -

Compare the first IEP to the second IEP and determine group consensus for increase or decrease of complexity and
progress for each component
 Determine if there was a change from the previous IEP to the next IEP
 Note the changes in between the columns with a 0, +, or  0 = No change from prior year
 + = Increased complexity of goals/objectives, time with non-disabled peers, or progress
 - = Decreased complexity of goals/objectives, time with non-disabled peers, or lack of progress

Repeat the process to compare the second IEP to the third IEP
Guiding Questions
 Has the assessment information demonstrated student growth?
 How have the need/concern and the impact the student’s participations and progress in
general education curriculum changed?
 How have the goals, objectives, accommodations, modifications increased in complexity?
 How have the services and placement increased the student’s time with non-disabled peers?
 What progress has the student made on the goals and objectives?
SERC
8
Revised 8/08
STEP 4
SERC
9