U. S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

Annual Report to Congress 

Of the Office for Civil Rights

Fiscal Year 2006

Annual Report to Congress 

Of the Office for Civil Rights

Fiscal Year 2006

July 2007

U.S. Department of Education
U.S. Department of Education

Margaret Spellings

Secretary

Office for Civil Rights

Stephanie Monroe

Assistant Secretary

This publication is in the public domain. Authorization to reproduce it in whole or in part is granted. The publication’s citation should be: U.S. Department of Education, Annual Report to Congress of 

the Office for Civil Rights: Fiscal Year 2006, Washington, D.C., 2007.

To order copies of this publication, write:

ED Pubs 

Education Publications Center 

U.S. Department of Education 

P.O. Box 1398 

Jessup, MD 20794-1398

You may fax your order to: 1-301-470-1244 or send an e-mail request to: edpubs@inet.ed.gov.

You may also call toll-free: 1-877-433-7827 (1-877-4-ED-PUBS). If 877service is not yet available in 

your area, call 1-800-872-5327 (1-800-USA-LEARN). Those who use a telecommunications device 

for the deaf (TDD) or a teletypewriter (TTY) should call 1-877-576-7734.

To order online, point your Internet browser to: http://www.edpubs.org.

This publication is also available on the Department’s Web site at http://www.ed.gov/ocr. Any updates to this publication will be available at this Web site.

On request, this publication is also available in alternate formats, such as Braille, large print or computer diskette. For more information, please contact the Department’s Alternate Format Center at 

1-202-260-0852 or 1-202-260-0818.

ii
OCR’s Mission 

Ensuring equal access to education and promoting 

educational excellence throughout the nation through 

vigorous enforcement of civil rights

iii
iv
CONTENTS

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . vii

FOREWORD. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ix

OVERVIEW OF OCR’S STRUCTURE AND PROGRAM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

 I. ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

 II. COMPLAINT INVESTIGATIONS AND RESOLUTIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

III. COMPLAINT JURISDICTIONS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

IV. COMPLIANCE REVIEWS AND OTHER PROACTIVE INITIATIVES. . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

 V. MONITORING. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8

VI. TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9

ENSURING EQUAL ACCESS TO EDUCATION: GETTING RESULTS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

I. TITLE VI OF THE Civil Rights Act of 1964. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

 A. Complaint Resolutions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

 B. Proactive Enforcement. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14

 C. Higher Education Desegregation Agreements. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15

II. TITLE IX OF THE EDUCATION AMENDMENTS OF 1972. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16

 A. Complaint Resolutions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16

 B. Proactive Enforcement. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18

 C. Regulatory and Policy Development. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19

III. SECTION 504 OF THE REHABILITATION ACT OF 1973 AND TITLE II OF THE 

 AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT OF 1990. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20

 A. Complaint Resolutions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20

 B. Proactive Enforcement. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23

 C. Regulatory and Policy Development. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24

IV. THE Age Discrimination Act OF 1975 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25

V. THE BOY SCOUTS OF AMERICA EQUAL ACCESS ACT. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25

 A. Complaint Resolution. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26

VI. OTHER PROGRAM MANDATES AND ACTIVITIES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26

 A. Magnet Schools Assistance Program (MSAP). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26

 B. Vocational Education Methods of Administration. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26

 C. Minority-Serving Institutions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27

 D. Gulf Coast Hurricanes Displacement Initiative . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27

v
VII. TECHNOLOGY. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28

 A. Case and Activity Management System. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28

 B. Civil Rights Data Collection. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28

 C. Web-Based Electronic Complaint Filing. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29

VIII. PROMOTING MANAGEMENT EXCELLENCE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29

 A. Customer Service. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30

 B. Staff Training and Development. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31

 C. Fiscal Management. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .31

 D. Human Capital Planning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .31

LOOKING AHEAD. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33

APPENDIX A: OFFICES AND ADDRESSES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34

APPENDIX B: FY 2006 COMPLAINT RECEIPTS, BY JURISDICTION

 AND OCR ENFORCEMENT OFFICE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .35

APPENDIX C: SAMPLE OF OCR TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE PUBLICATIONS 

 AVAILABLE AT WWW.ED.GOV/OCR. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36

vi
ILLUSTRATIONS

FIGURES

1. OCR’s Offices. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

2. FY 2006 Complaint Caseload, by Jurisdiction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 

3. FY 2005 Complaint Caseload, by Jurisdiction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6

4. FY 2004 Complaint Caseload, by Jurisdiction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 

5. FY 2003 Complaint Caseload, by Jurisdiction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6

6. FY 2002 Complaint Caseload, by Jurisdiction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 

7. FY 2001 Complaint Caseload, by Jurisdiction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6

8. FY 2000 Complaint Caseload, by Jurisdiction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

9. Number of FOIA Requests Received by OCR, FY 2000–06. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30

TABLES

1. OCR Budget Requests, Appropriations, FTE Usage and Workload, 1996–2006.. . . . . . . . . . . 2

2. OCR Compliance Reviews Initiated and Resolved, by Issue: FY 2006. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8

3. Percentage of Final Case Resolution Documents Accessible to OCR Staff via 

CAMS’ Document Management System. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28

vii
viii
 FOREWORD

It is my pleasure to present the Office for Civil Rights’ (OCR) 

Annual Report to Congress for FY 2006. In this report, OCR provides 

a summary of its substantive achievements in FY 2006. I am proud 

to serve with the highly motivated, qualified and committed staff 

of OCR in furthering the mission of this office on behalf of our 

nation’s students. 

OCR’s mission is to ensure equal access to education and to 

promote educational excellence throughout the nation through 

vigorous enforcement of civil rights. This report details OCR’s 

accomplishments in enforcing the civil rights laws under which 

OCR has been granted jurisdiction to address and remedy 

discrimination. These enforcement efforts include complaint investigation and resolution, and 

proactive enforcement through compliance reviews and technical assistance, as well as regulatory 

and policy development. This report also highlights OCR’s efforts to improve its enforcement 

capabilities by promoting management excellence. Even in light of shrinking resources and 

increasing complaint receipts, OCR continues to accomplish its mission and meet the highest 

performance and quality standards. 

The No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (NCLB) is based on the premise that every child can learn. In 

announcing No Child Left Behind in January 2001, President Bush said, “These reforms express my 

deep belief in our public schools and their mission to build the mind and character of every child, 

from every background, in every part of America.” For every child to learn, every child must have 

equal access to educational opportunities. OCR continues to play a key role in ensuring equal access. 

A primary requirement of NCLB is grade-level proficiency for all students by 2014. The President’s 

American Competitiveness Initiative announced in the president’s 2006 State of the Union address 

further emphasizes the importance of this goal. President Bush explained, “[T]o keep America 

competitive, one commitment is necessary above all: We must continue to lead the world in talent 

and human creativity.” Education is key 

to keeping America competitive. To fully 

realize the great talent and ingenuity 

present in this country, all Americans must 

have equal access to education. We must 

not let discrimination hinder the next step: 

ensuring that every child does learn. 

Ensuring that no child is left behind 

includes making certain that no child is subjected to discrimination in our schools. OCR’s efforts in 

2006 had a profound impact on securing access to high-quality education for all students, such as by 

ensuring that: elementary and secondary school students with disabilities receive a free appropriate 

public education; students are not incorrectly placed in special education on the basis of race or 

due to the student’s limited English proficiency; schools respond appropriately when students are 

subjected to racial, sexual or disability harassment; and postsecondary education institutions provide 

access to programs to individuals with disabilities. 

ix

If we ensure that America’s children succeed in life, they 

will ensure that America succeeds in the world.

 President George W. Bush

 2006 State of the Union address
When U.S. Secretary of Education Margaret Spellings announced her “Action Plan for Higher 

Education” in FY 2006, she stated: “[t]here 

are far too many Americans who want to 

go to college but can’t—either because 

they’re not prepared or can’t afford it. To 

expand access to higher education we must 

better prepare our students—starting with 

high standards and accountability in our 

public schools.” OCR continues to work 

to prevent and address discrimination at 

the postsecondary level so that all students 

have the opportunity to obtain higher 

education. OCR’s work in ensuring access 

to high-quality elementary and secondary school programs also impacts the success of the American 

postsecondary education system by providing students access to academic programs and activities that 

better prepare them for college. Ultimately, these efforts necessarily impact the nation’s ability to 

succeed in a competitive global economy. 

Secretary Spellings has said, “We are honored and trusted with the responsibility of ensuring our next 

generation is equipped to participate in the American Dream.” For all students to be equipped, all 

students must have equal access to educational opportunities. This Annual Report to Congress details 

OCR’s efforts in meeting this mission.

Respectfully submitted,

Stephanie Monroe

Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights

Our aim is simply to ensure that in a new era of global 

competition, higher education remains the path to the 

American Dream, and that more Americans have access 

to it.

 Secretary Margaret Spellings

 Remarks at the National Press Club: 

 An Action Plan for Higher Education

 Sept. 26, 2006

x


Annual Report to Congress: Fiscal Year 2006

OVERVIEW OF OCR’S STRUCTURE AND PROGRAM

The Office for Civil Rights (OCR) in the U.S. Department of Education (ED) is responsible for 

enforcing five federal civil rights laws prohibiting discrimination on the bases of race, color and 

national origin, sex, disability and age by recipients of federal financial assistance. These laws are:

• Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (prohibiting discrimination based on race, color and 

national origin);

• Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 (prohibiting sex discrimination in 

education programs);

• Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (prohibiting disability discrimination);

• The Age Discrimination Act of 1975 (prohibiting age discrimination); and 

• Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (prohibiting disability discrimination by 

public entities, whether or not they receive federal financial assistance, such as elementary and 

secondary education systems and institutions, institutions of higher education and vocational 

education other than schools of medicine, dentistry, nursing and other health-related schools, 

and libraries).

In addition, OCR enforces the Boy Scouts of America Equal Access Act. This law, part of the No 

Child Left Behind Act of 2001, provides equal access to meet in school forums for the Boy Scouts 

of America and other youth groups designated, in Title 36 of the United States Code, as “patriotic 

societies.” The act applies to any public elementary school, public secondary school or state or local 

education agency that has a designated open forum or limited public forum and that receives funds 

from ED.

These civil rights laws represent a national commitment to end discrimination in education 

programs. Since most education institutions receive some type of federal financial assistance, these 

laws apply throughout the nation.

Coverage of these civil rights laws extends to:

• 17,468 public elementary and secondary education agencies1; 

• 4,216 colleges and universities; and2

• thousands of institutions conferring certificates below the associate degree level, such as training 

schools for truck drivers and cosmetologists, and other entities, such as libraries, museums, and 

vocational rehabilitation agencies.3 

Consequently, these civil rights laws protect millions of students attending or seeking to attend our 

education institutions. In certain situations, the laws also protect persons who are employed or 

seeking employment at education institutions. Overall, these laws protect:

1 U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics (2005). Digest of Education Statistics 2004-05, Table 86, “Number of public elementary and secondary education agencies, by type of agency and state or jurisdiction: 2002–03 and 2003–04,” Washington, D.C.: Author.

2 Ibid, Table 244, “Degree-granting institutions and branches, by type and control of institution and state or jurisdiction: 2004–05.”

3

 Ibid, Table 355, “Number of non-degree-granting Title IV institutions offering postsecondary education, by control and state or jurisdiction: 2000–01 through 2004–05.” 
Annual Report to Congress: Fiscal Year 2006 

• more than 48.7 million students attending public elementary and secondary schools;4 and

• more than 17.6 million students attending degree-granting institutions, such as colleges 

and universities.5

Enforcing these laws is critical to carrying out the mission of ED: to promote student 

achievement and preparation for global competitiveness by fostering educational excellence and 

ensuring equal access.

In FY 2006, OCR’s budget was $90,611,000, with full-time equivalent (FTE) usage of 630. See 

Table 1 showing appropriations, FTEs and workload from 1996 to 2006.

Table 1. OCR Budget Requests, Appropriations, FTE Usage and Workload, 1996–2006.

 FY Presidential Congressional FTE Complaints Compliance Reviews

 Request Appropriation (Usage) Filed Resolved† Initiated Resolved†

2006† $91,526,000 $90,611,000 630 5,805 5,893 9 72

2005 $92,801,000 $89,375,000 640 5,533 5,365 73 66

2004 $91,275,000 $88,305,000 655 5,044 4,968 53 29

2003 $89,710,000 $85,715,000 672 5,141 5,246 74 14

2002 $79,934,000 $79,666,000 698 5,019 4,842 11 18

2001 $76,000,000 $75,822,000 696 4,571 4,777 21 43

2000 $73,262,000 $71,200,000 712 4,897 6,364 47 71

1999 $68,000,000 $66,000,000 727 6,628†† 5,369 76 93

1998 $61,500,000 $61,500,000 685 4,847 4,753 102 100

1997 $60,000,000 $54,900,000 681 5,296 4,981 152 140

1996 $62,784,000 $55,277,000 744 4,828 4,886 146 173

† Includes cases carried over from previous years.

†† 1,614 filed by a single complainant.

4 U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics (2006). Projections of Education Statistics to 2015 (NCES-2005074), Table 1 “Actual and projected numbers for enrollment in grades PK–12, PK–8 and 9–12 in elementary and secondary schools, by control of school: Fall 1990 through fall 2015,”, Washington, 

D.C.: Author.

5 Ibid, Table 10, “Actual and alternative projected numbers for total enrollment in all degree-granting postsecondary institutions, by sex, attendance status, and control of institution: Fall 1990 through fall 2015.” .
Annual Report to Congress: Fiscal Year 2006

I. ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE

OCR is composed of a headquarters office, located in Washington, D.C., and 12 enforcement offices 

representing 12 regions located in the United States and its jurisdictions. The headquarters office 

provides overall leadership, policy development and coordination of enforcement activities. The 

enforcement offices are responsible for investigating and resolving complaints of discrimination, 

conducting compliance reviews, monitoring corrective action agreements, and providing technical 

assistance. The majority of OCR’s staff are assigned to the enforcement offices, which are located in 

Boston, New York, Philadelphia, Washington, D.C., Atlanta, Dallas, Cleveland, Chicago, Kansas City, 

Denver, San Francisco, and Seattle. Appendix A lists the enforcement offices and contact information.

Figure 1. OCR’s Offices

H Seattle

H San

 Francisco

H 

Chicago

Cleveland 

H

H Boston

H New York

H Philadelphia

H Atlanta

H Washington, D.C.

( Headquarters and 

	 regional office)

H Dallas

II. COMPLAINT INVESTIGATIONS AND RESOLUTIONS

One of the most important ways OCR carries out its responsibilities is by investigating and resolving 

complaints. People who believe there has been a violation of the civil rights laws enforced by OCR 

may file a complaint with the appropriate enforcement office. 

In resolving complaints, OCR’s primary objectives are to promptly investigate the allegations of 

discrimination, to accurately determine whether the civil rights laws have been violated, and to 

remedy the violation. In FY 2006, OCR received 5,805 complaints and resolved 5,893, some of 

which had been filed in previous years. (See Table 1. Also, Appendix B shows FY 2006 complaint 

receipts by OCR enforcement office.) 

 H 

Denver H Kansas 

 City
Annual Report to Congress: Fiscal Year 2006 

 

Timeliness is critical to students and parents in the resolution of civil rights issues. OCR has set goals 

for timeliness, which serve as a useful measure of the efficiency and effectiveness of its complaint 

resolution process. OCR’s goal is to have at least 80 percent of new complaints resolved within 180 

days of being filed. In FY 2006, 91 percent of new complaints were resolved in 180 days, significantly 

exceeding the target of 80 percent. 

OCR continues to meet or exceed its customers’ expectations of resolving complaints in a timely and 

thorough manner as well as its Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA) performance indicator, as 

demonstrated in the chart below.

In FY 2006, the performance target was modified to measure whether at least 80 percent of complaints 

with due dates in the relevant fiscal year were resolved within the 180 day timeframe. The charts below 

illustrate performance results for FY 2006 using the new standard as well as prior fiscal year results using 

the former standard.

 

Current performance measures for complaint workload: 

 Fiscal Number of Complaints With Number of Complaints Resolved Percentage of 

 Year Resolution Due Dates in FY 2006* Within 180 Days of Receipt Complaints Within 180 Days

2006 5,692 5,201 91%

*Complaints received April 1, 2005 through March 31, 2006 have resolution due dates in FY 2006.

Historical performance measure for complaint workload:

 Fiscal Number of Complaints Number of Complaints Percentage of Complaints

 Year Resolved Resolved Within 180 Days Within 180 Days

 2002 4,842 4,301 89%

 2003 5,225 4,737 91%

 2004 4,968 4,539 92%

 2005 5,365 4,924 92%

In addition, after identifying an increase in the percentage of pending cases, OCR added a new target to 

ensure that no more than 25 percent of pending cases would be over 180 days old. In FY 2006, only 21

percent of pending cases were over 180 days old, exceeding the 25 percent GPRA target.

Fiscal Number of Pending Number of Pending Complaints Percentage of Pending

 Year Complaints Over 180 Days Complaints Over 180 Days

2006 1,458 308 21%
Annual Report to Congress: Fiscal Year 2006

OCR’s Case Resolution and Investigation Manual (CRIM) (updated May 2005) provides procedures 

for promptly and effectively investigating and resolving complaints. The CRIM explains how OCR 

will process all phases of complaint resolution, including evaluation, investigation, resolution, 

monitoring, and enforcement. The CRIM is posted on OCR’s Web site and is available to the 

public at http://www.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/docs/ocrcrm.html.

During FY 2006, OCR continued using an investigative approach that stresses full investigation 

of complaints prior to making a determination of compliance. In some cases, OCR will also use 

the Early Complaint Resolution (ECR) process to resolve cases. The ECR process facilitates the 

resolution of complaints by providing an opportunity for the parties involved to voluntarily resolve 

the allegations that prompted the complaint. If OCR determines that ECR is appropriate and 

the complainant and the recipient are willing to proceed, OCR will initiate ECR to facilitate an 

agreement between the recipient and the complainant. ECR may take place at any time during 

the investigative process. OCR does not sign, approve, or endorse any agreement reached between 

the parties. However, OCR assists both parties in understanding pertinent legal standards and 

possible remedies. OCR will not monitor the agreement but will inform the parties that if a breach 

occurs, the complainant has the right to file another complaint. OCR monitors the process of 

ECR carefully to ensure adequate time for completion of the investigation in the event that ECR 

is unsuccessful. The investigation must be completed in accordance with normal case processing 

standards and timelines. In FY 2006, OCR resolved 218 complaints using the ECR process.

If, after a full investigation, OCR determines that there is evidence of a violation, OCR will attempt 

to negotiate a resolution agreement with the recipient to correct the violation. Pursuant to both 

statute and regulation, OCR is obligated to resolve civil rights violations by voluntary and informal 

means, if possible. If negotiation and resolution methods fail, OCR issues a violation letter of 

findings and again attempts to negotiate a settlement agreement to correct the violations. It is 

only after OCR has advised recipients of their failure to comply with the civil rights laws and has 

determined compliance cannot be secured by voluntary means that, as a last resort, OCR seeks 

compliance through the administrative hearing process or refers cases to the U.S. Department of 

Justice for judicial enforcement. 

If the complainant disagrees with a decision not to proceed with a complaint or a determination that 

the investigation did not establish a violation of law, OCR has procedures whereby the complainant 

may ask OCR to reconsider the decision. A complainant may not request reconsideration when 

OCR has investigated, found a compliance concern, and entered into an agreement with a recipient. 

Reconsiderations focus on factual or legal concerns that could change the disposition of the case.

III. COMPLAINT JURISDICTIONS

As in most years, the majority of complaints OCR received in FY 2006 alleged discrimination on 

the basis of disability (52 percent). Overall, the focus of complaints filed over the last several years 

has remained fairly consistent, with similar percentages of complaint receipts in each of the subjectmatter jurisdictional areas.
Annual Report to Congress: Fiscal Year 2006 

Figures 2 through 8 below show the number and percentage of complaint receipts by jurisdiction for 

each fiscal year, 2000 through 2006. (Note, “other” includes mostly complaints over which OCR 

had no jurisdiction or that were referred to another agency.) Appendix B provides a breakout of 

complaint receipts by jurisdiction and by jurisdiction and OCR enforcement office.

Figure 2 Figure 3

 Figure 4 Figure 5

Figure 6 Figure 7

FY 2005 Complaint Caseload by Jurisdiction 

5,533 Receipts

Other

9%

(521)

Multiple

13%

(706)

Age

1%

(82)

Disability

53%

(2,893)

Sex

6%

(319)

Race/National 

Origin

18%

(1,012)

FY 2006 Complaint Caseload by Jurisdiction 5,805 

Receipts

Other

11%

(612)

Multiple

13%

(750)

Age

1%

(86)

Disability

52%

(3,025)

Sex

6%

(334)

Race/National 

Origin

17%

(998)

FY 2004 Complaint Caseload by Jurisdction

 5,044 Receipts

Age

1%

(71)

Multiple

12%

(583)

Other

11%

(537)

Disability

51%

(2,624)

Sex

6%

(283)

Race/National 

Origin

19%

(946)

FY 2003 Complaint Caseload by Jurisdiction 

5,141 Receipts

Disability

52%

(2,657)

Sex

7%

(335)

Race/National 

Origin

19%

(978)

Age

1%

(73)

Multiple

12%

(622)

Other

9%

(476)

FY 2002 Complaint Caseload by Jurisdiction 

5,019 Receipts

Other

8% (385)

Multiple

12% (620)

Age

1% (75)

Disability

54% (2,701)

Sex

7% (353)

Race/National 

Origin

18% (885)

FY 2001 Complaint Caseload by Jurisdiction 

4,571 Receipts

Race/National 

Origin

19% (850)

Sex

7% (313)

Disability

53% (2,462)

Age

1% (48)

Multiple

13% (599)

Other

7% (299)

FY 2006 Complaint Caseload, by Jurisdiction

5,805 Receipts

FY 2005 Complaint Caseload, by Jurisdiction

5,533 Receipts

FY 2004 Complaint Caseload, by Jurisdiction

5,044 Receipts

FY 2003 Complaint Caseload, by Jurisdiction

5,141 Receipts

FY 2002 Complaint Caseload, by Jurisdiction

5,019 Receipts

FY 2001 Complaint Caseload, by Jurisdiction

4,571 Receipts

Disability 

53% (2,462)

Disability Disability

Disability

Disability

52%

(2,893)

Disability

Multiple

13% (599)

Age

1% (48)

Other

7% (299)

Race/National Origin

19% (850)

Sex

7% (313)
Annual Report to Congress: Fiscal Year 2006

 Figure 8

 

The number of complaints indicated on the chart as received in each of the jurisdictions represents 

those complaints that were “purely” within that jurisdiction. Those complaints that contained, for 

example, allegations of both sex and race discrimination, are counted in the “Multiple” section. 

With this in mind, the following represents the total number of complaints, received in FY 2006, 

that contained allegations in each of the jurisdictions, including in those complaints that contained 

allegations in the “Multiple” jurisdiction category.

Title VI: 1,585 complaints received containing race discrimination allegations (including 998 

complaints that contained only Title VI issues)

Title IX: 670 complaints received containing sex discrimination allegations (including 334 complaints 

that contained only Title IX issues)

Section 504/Title II: 3,511 complaints received containing disability discrimination allegations 

(including 3,025 complaints that contained only Section 504/Title II issues)

Age Discrimination Act: 359 complaints received containing age discrimination allegations (including 

86 complaints that contained only Age Discrimination Act issues)

IV. COMPLIANCE REVIEWS AND OTHER PROACTIVE INITIATIVES

In addition to resolving complaints, OCR initiates compliance reviews and takes other proactive 

steps to focus on specific compliance problems that are particularly acute or national in scope. It 

has been OCR’s experience that targeted compliance reviews and proactive initiatives increase the 

impact of OCR’s resources, complement the complaint resolution process, and can benefit larger 

numbers of students than sole reliance on complaint resolutions, which may involve only one student. 

Compliance review sites are selected based on various sources of information, including information 

provided by parents, education groups, media, community organizations, and the public, and, in 

certain circumstances, on statistical data if they are supported by other sources of information. 

FY 2000 Complaint Caseload by Jurisdiction 

4,897 Receipts

Multiple

11% (541)

Race/National 

Origin

18% (870)

Sex

8% (396)

Disability

55% (2,693)

Age

1% (61)

Other

7% (336)

FY 2000 Complaint Caseload, by Jurisdiction

4,897 Receipts

Disability
Annual Report to Congress: Fiscal Year 2006 

In FY 2006, OCR focused significant resources on resolving pending compliance reviews. In FY 2006, 

OCR resolved 72 of 106 reviews, exceeding the FY 2005 total number of reviews resolved. In addition, 

OCR initiated nine new compliance reviews that focused on several important areas, including sexual 

harassment, minorities in special education, Title IX grievance procedures, services for students with 

limited English proficiency and inappropriate inclusion of students with limited English proficiency 

in special education. More specific information about the compliance reviews resolved during FY 

2006 is included later in this report. Table 2 shows the number of reviews initiated and resolved by 

compliance issue.

Table 2. OCR Compliance Reviews Initiated and Resolved, by Issue: FY 2006

Compliance Issue Initiated Resolved*

Accessibility (Section 504, ADA Title II) 13

Discipline (Title VI) 1 

Access to Gifted and Talented (Title VI) 2

Services for Students with Limited English Proficiency/

Limited English Proficient Students and Special Education 

(Title VI, Section 504, ADA Title II) 2 9

Minorities and Special Education 

(Title VI, Section 504, Title II ADA) 1 26

Procedural Requirements (Title IX) 1 15

Procedural Requirements (Title IX, 504, Title VI, Age) 2 

Sexual Harassment (Title IX) 2 7

Total 9 72 *Includes compliance reviews carried over from previous years

V. MONITORING

To ensure accountability and effectiveness in enforcing the civil rights laws, OCR monitors 

complaint and compliance review resolution agreements to ensure the commitments made by 

school districts, colleges, universities and other appropriate entities in those agreements are 

carried out. During FY 2006, OCR monitored a total of 1,037 cases. OCR also completed the 

monitoring of a number of resolution agreements and, after ensuring that all commitments had 

been fully implemented, closed 365 cases—315 complaints and 50 compliance reviews. The 315 

complaints closed after monitoring involved diverse jurisdictions and issues, including: 48 Title VI 

race and-or national origin discrimination, 44 Title IX sex discrimination, 192 Section 504-ADA 

Title II disability discrimination, 28 multiple jurisdictions, and 3 retaliation. The 50 compliance 

reviews closed after monitoring involved jurisdictions and issues such as: 19 Title VI race andor national origin discrimination, 24 Title IX sex discrimination, 2 Section 504-Title II disability 

discrimination, and 5 involving both Title VI and disability issues. 
Annual Report to Congress: Fiscal Year 2006

VI. TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE 

Technical assistance to education institutions assists them in complying with federal civil rights 

requirements, while assistance to parents, students and others informs them of their rights under 

the law. Both components are critical to OCR’s success in meeting its mission. OCR provides 

information and other support services through a variety of methods, including on-site consultations, 

conferences, training, community meetings, and publication and dissemination of materials—

including extensive materials publicly posted on the Internet—to interested parties, including 

students, parents, teachers, administrators, schools, colleges, universities and community groups. 

Appendix C lists a sample of the technical assistance publications available on OCR’s Web site, 

www.ed.gov/ocr.

In FY 2006, OCR provided nearly 170 technical 

assistance presentations at over 130 events. 

Entities hosting these presentations included 

state departments of education, colleges and 

universities, school districts and associations. 

OCR participated in national and regional 

conferences. OCR also participated in small 

classes for college students preparing to become 

teachers. Audiences for OCR presentations 

included school administrators, educators, 

parents, students, guidance counselors, 

psychologists, therapists, school attorneys, Section 

504 and ADA coordinators, Title IX coordinators 

and English as a Second Language teachers.

Disability is by far the most requested subject 

matter for technical assistance. In FY 2006, OCR provided over 110 presentations that focused 

entirely or partially on disability issues. The most commonly presented disability presentation 

concerned students with disabilities transitioning from the high school setting to the postsecondary 

setting. The second most popular presentation explained the requirements under Section 504 of 

the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 for public elementary and secondary schools. OCR also provided 

technical assistance presentations on its policy regarding students with limited English proficiency 

(LEP), Title IX, Title IX athletics, sexual harassment and racial harassment, as well as an overview of 

all the laws enforced by OCR.

Recently, three members of your staff came down 

to do a Title IX day-long seminar for personnel in 

my nine school districts. Throughout the process of 

scheduling, preparing for, and hosting the day ... I 

cannot begin to tell you what a pleasure it was to 

work with your staff. They were very professional ... 

flexible to meet our unique needs of a diverse group 

of attendees ... and a joy to work with. If we ever 

have a need in our region again, I (and anyone else 

in my consortium) will not hesitate to pick up the 

phone and call your office.

E-mail from an executive director of a consortium
Annual Report to Congress: Fiscal Year 2006

10
11

Annual Report to Congress: Fiscal Year 2006

ENSURING EQUAL ACCESS TO EDUCATION: GETTING Results

Each year, OCR investigates thousands of cases that result in resolution agreements impacting 

hundreds of thousands of students. OCR understands its critical mission: Ensuring equal access 

to education and promoting educational excellence throughout the nation through vigorous enforcement 

of civil rights. OCR is constantly striving to improve the effectiveness and efficiency of its case 

resolution process. Following are case-related examples of OCR’s work in FY 2006. These 

important resolutions have a positive impact on students, parents and teachers, and ultimately, on 

the success of our nation’s education system. 

I. TITLE VI OF THE Civil Rights Act of 1964

Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color or national 

origin by recipients of federal financial assistance. The Title VI regulations (34 C.F.R. Part 100) 

call for OCR investigations when an individual or representative files a complaint with the agency. 

The regulations also call for periodic compliance reviews on issues identified by OCR. OCR staff 

have investigated and resolved numerous cases since Title VI’s inception, including desegregation, 

overrepresentation of minority students in special education classes, underrepresentation of minority 

students in gifted and talented classes, racial harassment, and limited English proficient (LEP)-

related issues. 

A. Complaint Resolutions

Resolved Through Early Complaint Resolution (ECR)

• A complaint alleged that two American Indian children enrolled at a high school were subjected 

to racially offensive comments from other students that created a racially hostile environment for 

them at school. The complaint alleged that the district failed to respond adequately to address 

the racially hostile environment and that a district teacher also unfairly punished a student based 

on race. With the help of OCR, the parent and the district entered into an agreement through 

OCR’s Early Complaint Resolution process. The district agreed to take appropriate steps to 

ensure that the children’s environment at school would be free from racial hostility, to establish 

procedures for reporting and investigating complaints of racial harassment promptly, to ensure 

adherence to its disciplinary policy for violations of its anti-harassment policy, and to expunge the 

one student’s disciplinary records. 

• A complaint alleged that the district failed to take action when an African-American high school 

student was subjected to racially offensive comments from other students. With the help of OCR, 

the parent and the district entered into an agreement through OCR’s Early Complaint Resolution 

process. The district agreed to promptly address allegations of harassment filed by the student, 

take disciplinary actions as appropriate, and notify the parent of the outcome of its investigation 

regarding the harassment allegations. In addition, the district agreed to provide training for 

administrators and other staff to ensure that the school environment would be free from acts of 

racial harassment and to reinforce with students the district’s policies and procedures prohibiting, 

and imposing discipline for, the harassment of students based on race. 

Discipline

• A complaint alleged a school district discriminated against black and Native American high 

school students by imposing upon them harsher disciplinary sanctions than were given to white 
Annual Report to Congress: Fiscal Year 2006

12

students with similar infractions. OCR’s investigation found a pattern of different treatment 

on the basis of race and national origin in the district’s imposition of disciplinary sanctions. As 

part of its corrective action agreement, the district agreed to evaluate its discipline policy and 

procedures; institute a data tracking process that would allow discipline referrals and sanctions 

to be monitored and analyzed based on race and national origin to ensure non-discriminatory 

implementation; and train staff involved in making disciplinary referrals and determining 

disciplinary sanctions. 

Segregation

• OCR resolved a Title VI complaint in which the district did not dispute the allegation that 

it was segregating elementary school Hispanic students based on national origin. The district 

acknowledged that the segregation was not justified under the district’s approach to educating 

students with limited English proficiency (LEP). The district entered into a settlement agreement 

with OCR in which the district agreed to discontinue classes that isolated LEP Hispanic students, 

and to develop and implement its LEP program in the least segregated manner that was consistent 

with achieving the program’s goals. 

• A complaint alleged that a school district discriminated against students on the basis of race by 

requiring the high school student body vote for queens and members of the homecoming court 

on the basis of race. OCR’s investigation found that students were given two separate listings: one 

with black candidates and one with white candidates. The district agreed to voluntarily resolve 

this complaint by revising its procedures, eliminating the segregatory listings, and deleting any 

reference to race from the selection process. 

Limited English Proficient (LEP) Students

In FY 2006, OCR received 40 complaints 

involving issues related to students with limited 

English proficiency (LEP). This was up from 35 

complaints received in FY 2005.

• A complaint alleged that a school district, 

located in a refugee resettlement city that had 

become the home to many Somali refugees, 

failed to provide Somali students who did not 

speak English with effective instruction in academic content areas and English acquisition. OCR’s 

investigation found, among other things, instances in which the school district failed to provide 

the Somali students with effective access to its education program. The district agreed to hire 

additional bilingual tutors, hire an outreach worker to provide translation and liaison services for 

parents of the Somali students, and offer Somali students compensatory instruction during the 

summer months.

• A complaint alleged that a school district 

discriminated against national-origin minority 

students who are LEP by excluding them from 

its gifted and talented program. In response 

to OCR’s investigative findings, the district 

Remembering to communicate with parents in languages they understand is now part of our routine.

 Letter from school administrator

Thank you for your thorough investigation and for 

assisting us in ensuring that the rights of the Somali 

children ... are upheld.

 Letter from the complainant
13

Annual Report to Congress: Fiscal Year 2006

agreed to ensure that eligibility criteria for the 

gifted and talented program did not screen out 

LEP students because of their limited English. 

The district also agreed to take steps to make 

LEP students and their parents aware of the 

eligibility and program changes made to the 

gifted and talented program. 

• OCR closed the monitoring of a settlement 

agreement that concerned a school district’s 

failure to provide parents with limited English 

proficiency (LEP parents) with information 

about school-related matters in a language they 

could understand. The agreement required the 

district to develop a written plan specifying 

how the school would provide information 

about school matters which would be understandable to LEP parents. In its last monitoring 

progress report, the school’s administrator reported that the district indicated that “LEP parents 

and students now have equal access to its programs and that the communication process with 

LEP parents, which is so vitally important in an organization, is much better improved.” The 

administrator also thanked OCR for its guidance. 

Racial Harassment

Harassment in schools can deny students the right to an education free of discrimination, threaten 

students’ physical or emotional well-being, influence how well they do in school and make it difficult 

for students to achieve their career goals. Preventing and remedying harassment in schools is 

essential to ensuring a safe environment in which students can learn.

• OCR closed the monitoring of a corrective action agreement that concerned a school district’s 

failure to promptly address persistent and pervasive racially harassing name-calling of a student. 

The agreement required the district to conduct training for school staff and students and issue a 

letter to the harassed student and the student’s parents identifying the steps the district took and 

would continue to take to address the issue. 

• OCR resolved a complaint alleging that a district failed to respond to a racially hostile 

environment and disciplined African-American students differently on the basis of their race at 

a high school. Although OCR found insufficient evidence to support a violation of Title VI, its 

investigation to determine whether a racially hostile environment existed in the school included 

interviews with students regarding their experiences. This provided a great deal of information 

to the district regarding the perceptions and experiences of some of its minority students. 

The district then independently implemented several initiatives. The director of the district’s 

vocational school later contacted OCR for technical assistance regarding this issue. 

The last 10 years of Civil Rights Data Collection6

shows a progressive increase in the total number and percentage of LEP students from 1994 

through 2004. In 1994, 6.12 percent of the students 

(2,612,161 students) in the nation’s public schools 

were identified as needing LEP services. By 2004, 

8.74 percent of the students (4,205,872 students) 

required LEP services. As of 2004, approximately 

one of every 11 students was classified as requiring 

LEP services, and 89.4 percent of them were receiving such services. For 2007, the projected percentage 

of students needing LEP services is estimated to be 

9.53 percent, indicating almost one in 10 students 

in the nation needs LEP service.

6

U.S. Department of Education (2004). “Office for Civil Rights Elementary and Secondary School Survey Projections and Documentation” 1994–2004, Civil Rights Data 

Collection (previously called OCR’s Elementary and Secondary School Survey, 1968–2003), Washington, D.C.: Author.
Annual Report to Congress: Fiscal Year 2006

14

B. Proactive Enforcement

Compliance Reviews

Continuing a nationwide initiative under Title 

VI, Section 504 and Title II to address the 

discriminatory misclassification of students, based 

on race, as in need of special education, OCR 

initiated numerous compliance reviews in FY 

2003, 2004 and 2005 examining whether minority 

students were being denied education benefits 

because of discriminatory inclusion in or exclusion 

from special education. During these years, OCR 

also focused its reviews on school districts around 

the country to determine whether LEP students 

were being discriminated against by inappropriate 

inclusion in or exclusion from special education 

because of their limited English proficiency, and 

to ensure that such students were provided the 

services they needed so they could participate meaningfully in the districts’ education programs. In 

FY 2006, OCR resolved 26 compliance reviews that focused on the issue of minorities in special 

education and nine that focused specifically on the issue of LEP students in special education.

• In FY 2006, OCR completed and resolved a compliance review that addressed the issue of 

minorities in gifted and talented programs in a major urban school district. As a result of 

OCR’s review, the district created gifted and talented programs in traditionally underserved 

communities, enrichment programs and multi-source notices to parents in each community. The 

district also implemented a new multiple-criteria test to assess student eligibility for the programs, 

and established training to provide professional development for teachers in those programs.

• OCR resolved compliance reviews of three school districts concerning the evaluation of LEP 

students, and their referral and placement into special education. One district agreed to develop 

and implement a system to track and monitor the identification and assessment process for LEP 

students. Another district agreed to implement procedures for the identification and assessment 

of LEP students; ensure that the native language, cultural background and other factors were 

taken into account when LEP students were evaluated for special education; and take steps to 

ensure effective communication with LEP parents. The third district agreed, among other things, 

to explain and discuss the home language survey with all parents of students enrolled in the 

district; assess the English proficiency of students whose home language was not English; and 

provide effective access to the regular education intervention process for LEP students. 

• In another compliance review, OCR found a school district violated Title VI and Section 504 by 

exiting LEP students who were also in special education from LEP programs based solely on oral 

language proficiency, rather than considering all of the modalities. OCR also found the district 

limited the services provided to LEP students who remained in both programs. OCR found a 

violation regarding the district’s written policy concerning communication with LEP parents. 
15

Annual Report to Congress: Fiscal Year 2006

The district agreed to review and revise its procedures so that exiting decisions would be based 

upon an assessment of the student’s total English language proficiency. The district also agreed to 

communicate school-related information to parents in a language they understood. 

Technical Assistance 

As part of its proactive enforcement of Title VI, OCR provided presentations on harassment, 

including racial harassment, at events ranging 

from a national conference focusing on 

American-Arabs, to a training session for 

teachers, administrators and staff of a school 

district. At a conference concerning LEP 

students, OCR discussed the responsibilities 

of schools to address and prevent racial 

harassment in addition to discussing the schools’ 

responsibilities to ensure equal educational 

opportunities for LEP students. 

OCR has conducted numerous technical 

assistance presentations on its policies regarding 

LEP students, including those organized through 

state boards of education and state-sponsored 

agencies. In addition, OCR participated in a Department-sponsored nationwide conference, with 

4,000 participants, which focused on No Child Left Behind issues with respect to the role of parental 

involvement. At that conference, OCR provided technical assistance to the conference’s participants 

about its role and the rights of parents of English Language Learners as well as responsibilities of 

recipients under Title VI. Many attendees were parents with limited English proficiency from all 

over the nation. OCR also participated in a conference hosted by a state department of education 

that included administrators and teachers from school districts faced with the responsibilities of 

serving LEP students displaced by hurricane Katrina. OCR provided information to the conference 

participants concerning the responsibilities of local education agencies in educating LEP students. 

C. Higher Education Desegregation Agreements

In the 1994 U.S. Supreme Court case United States v. Fordice (Fordice), the Court set forth standards 

for determining whether states that previously operated racially segregated higher education systems 

had met their affirmative duty to dismantle those systems and their vestiges under the Fourteenth 

Amendment to the U.S. Constitution and Title VI. After the Fordice decision, OCR negotiated and 

entered into agreements to address and resolve higher education desegregation compliance issues in 

Florida, Texas, Kentucky, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Maryland and Virginia.

During FY 2006, OCR continued to monitor implementation of its higher education agreements 

with the seven states, which continued to make progress in enhancing the programs and facilities of 

their historically black institutions and in carrying out the other commitments in their agreements. 

OCR continues to monitor the progress in those states to ensure compliance with Title VI. 

[T]hank you for your presentation on the various 

types of harassment during our in-service training 

... You did an excellent job explaining the various 

types of harassment and generated many positive 

comments. Thanks to OCR, our teachers and staff 

are better prepared to be proactive and prevent 

harassment in our schools. If I were grading you, 

you would receive an A+. Not only did you provide 

excellent information, you made a difficult to during and after the talk ... 

 Letter from a superintendent
Annual Report to Congress: Fiscal Year 2006

16

II. TITLE IX OF THE EDUCATION AMENDMENTS OF 1972

Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 

prohibits discrimination on the basis of sex in 

education programs and activities that receive 

federal funds. The enforcement provisions 

applicable to Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 

1964 (investigating complaints and conducting 

periodic compliance reviews on identified issues) 

are incorporated by reference in the Title IX 

regulations (34 C.F.R. Part 106). The Title IX 

regulations cover admissions and recruitment 

policies, participation in education programs 

and activities (such as athletics), financial 

assistance and employment in education programs 

and activities. 

A. Complaint Resolutions

In FY 2006, OCR received 670 complaints that 

contained allegations related to discrimination 

on the basis of sex. Over half of these complaints, 

338, involved elementary and secondary schools, 

and 250 alleged violations at postsecondary institutions. OCR received 144 complaints alleging 

discrimination in athletic programs and activities on the basis of sex. 

Sexual Harassment

In FY 2006, OCR received 95 complaints that included allegations of sexual harassment. The 

following are examples of resolutions OCR obtained that address this issue.

• A complaint alleged a school district failed to respond appropriately to information that a student 

had been sexually harassed. In the course of OCR’s investigation, the district acknowledged that 

its response was inadequate and agreed to take corrective action. OCR also found that the district 

did not have policies and procedures for addressing other forms of discrimination on the basis of 

sex other than sexual harassment. The district agreed to draft and publish grievance procedures 

in accordance with the requirements of Title IX, as well as to provide all students, parents and 

employees with a written notice regarding the availability of its grievance procedures. 

• A complaint alleged a school district failed to respond to allegations of sexual harassment in 

a prompt and appropriate manner when one of the district’s employees, a custodian, engaged 

in sexual activity with a secondary special education student during the school day. OCR 

determined the district’s response to the harassment failed to remedy the effects of the harassment 

on the student. As a result of OCR’s findings, the district agreed to offer and pay for counseling 

for the student and provide additional Title IX training for school staff.

Civil rights data indicates7 that in elementary and 

secondary education male student enrollment was 

higher than female student enrollment every year 

from 1994 through 2004. There were approximately 105 or more male students for every 100 female students. However, in regard to postsecondary 

education, a 2005 Digest of Education Statistics8

report indicates that of the young adults between 

the ages of 20 and 24 years, 903,000 males and 

1,320,000 females have bachelor’s degrees. Thus 

males have 40.6 percent of the degrees in this age 

range. Males are also going to college at lower 

rates, representing 44 percent of enrollment,9 and 

are graduating at even lower rates (40.6 percent). 

This in turn means that for every 100 females in 

this age range with bachelor’s degrees there are 

68.35 males with these degrees.

7 Ibid.

8 U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics (2005). Digest of Education Statistics: 2005, Table 9, “Number of persons age 18 and over, by highest 

level of education attained, age, sex and race/ethnicity: 2005.” Washington, D.C.: Author.

9

 Ibid., Table 168, “Enrollment, staff, and degrees conferred in postsecondary institutions participating in Title IV programs, by level and control of institution, sex, and type 

of degree: Fall 2003-04.”
17

Annual Report to Congress: Fiscal Year 2006

Resolved Through Early Complaint Resolution (ECR)

• A complaint, filed by the parent of a female junior high school student, alleged a school district 

failed to take effective corrective action when a male student sexually harassed the complainant’s 

daughter on a school bus. The complaint also alleged the school district subjected the female 

student to different treatment by disciplining her more severely than the male student following 

the incident. OCR facilitated an agreement between the parent and the district that was mutually 

acceptable to both parties. The district agreed, among other things, to apply its sexual harassment 

policy and procedures to address the actions of the male student and to take disciplinary action 

against him as necessary and appropriate under the policy. The suspension received by the female 

student was expunged from her record. In addition, the district, which enrolls more than 3,000 

students, agreed to train staff on its sexual harassment policies and procedures and review its 

student discipline procedures.

Athletics

In FY 2006, OCR received 144 complaints alleging discrimination in athletic programs and activities 

on the basis of sex. Of these, 16 were filed against post-secondary institutions, and 127 involved 

elementary and secondary schools. Additionally, 17 of the 144 athletics complaints concerned the issue 

of accommodating interest and ability, one of which was filed against a postsecondary institution. 

• A complaint alleged a school district did not provide female students with equal athletic 

opportunities in accordance with Title IX. Specifically, the complaint alleged that females at a 

junior high school had only one softball team while boys had two baseball teams and that females 

at the high school level had only two basketball teams while boys had three basketball teams. The 

complaint also alleged disparities regarding equipment and supplies, practice and competitive 

facilities, scheduling of games, assignment and compensation of coaches, and publicity. OCR’s 

investigation confirmed the district did not effectively accommodate the interests and abilities 

of members of both sexes on sports teams or provide equivalent benefits or opportunities. The 

district voluntarily entered into a resolution agreement with OCR in which it agreed, among 

other things, to offer additional interscholastic sports teams for female students; provide 

equipment and supplies equally among girls’ and boys’ athletic teams; and provide improved 

facilities for the softball team. OCR’s agreement in this complaint affected over 2,747 students.

• A complaint alleged that a school district discriminated against female students on the basis of 

sex by failing to effectively accommodate the athletic interests and abilities of students. After 

an investigation, OCR accepted a settlement agreement in which the district agreed to assess the 

athletic interests of its students and, if necessary, to develop a plan for effectively accommodating 

the interests and abilities of its students. OCR confirmed, through its monitoring activities, 

that the district’s actions pursuant to the OCR settlement agreement increased the number 

of interscholastic athletic participation opportunities available to girls by nearly 14 percent. 

Consistent with OCR policy to seek remedies that do not involve the cutting or reduction of 

teams in order to demonstrate compliance with Title IX, the district’s actions did not include 

elimination of opportunities for boys.
Annual Report to Congress: Fiscal Year 2006

18

• A complaint alleged that a district failed to 

provide female softball athletes at one of its 

high schools with equal athletic opportunities 

in the provision of locker rooms, and practice 

and competitive facilities. Based on OCR’s 

findings, the district agreed to provide 

equal athletic opportunities by making 

improvements at the high school’s softball 

field, including relocating one of its varsity 

softball fields to a more suitable location 

and installing bleachers, sideline fencing, 

fenced dugouts, player’s benches, outfield 

fencing, foul poles, a field irrigation system, a 

scoreboard and a regraded infield at the new 

site. The resolution affected over 40 girls at the high school who participated in interscholastic 

softball competition.

B. Proactive Enforcement

Compliance Reviews

As a part of its proactive enforcement plan, OCR resolved seven Title IX compliance reviews at 

postsecondary institutions. OCR conducted an extensive review of each recipient’s harassment 

policies, complaint and grievance procedures, and institutional publications. OCR identified areas of 

noncompliance at each of the institutions, and the recipients entered into agreements with OCR to 

take action to remedy Title IX compliance concerns. 

As a result of OCR’s review, the institutions agreed to implement internal institutional procedures 

for determining compliance with Title IX, and to provide steps to promptly and equitably remedy 

noncompliance. The recipients also agreed to disseminate uniform notices of nondiscrimination 

that comply with Title IX, and to write the notices so they would be easily understood, identified 

and located in all university publications. The postsecondary institutions also agreed to develop 

and use grievance procedures for allegations of sexual harassment filed by students, employees and 

outside parties.

In FY 2006, OCR ended monitoring of these agreements after determining that the recipients fully 

implemented the terms of the agreements and remedied the areas of noncompliance previously 

identified. OCR’s review of the policies and procedures at these postsecondary institutions affected a 

total of approximately 24,000 students.
19

Annual Report to Congress: Fiscal Year 2006

Technical Assistance

As part of its proactive enforcement of Title 

IX in FY 2006, OCR provided technical 

assistance presentations on the requirements 

of Title IX, including targeted presentations 

on Title IX as it applies to school athletics and 

on the responsibilities of schools to address 

and prevent sexual harassment. It provided 

technical assistance on sexual harassment to 

approximately 350 school district staff members, 

and it conducted a Title IX training workshop at 

a conference sponsored by a state association of 

school administrators. 

OCR also conducted training for representatives 

of a state university and a consortium of a sixcounty area, which includes nine school districts 

and serves over 68,000 public school students, approximately 6,000 educators, and several hundred 

education administrators, on Title IX procedural safeguards and the responsibilities of a school 

district under Title IX. 

C. Regulatory and Policy Development

Single-Sex Education

After analyzing almost 6,000 comments, OCR 

completed work on the amendments to the 

Title IX regulations, to provide more flexibility 

in creating single-sex education options at 

the elementary and secondary level. Both 

the secretary of education and the Office of 

Management and Budget approved the final 

regulations for publication in the Federal Register. 

They were published in October 2006.

Sexual Harassment

Sexual harassment of students is a serious 

problem at all levels of education. On Jan. 25, 

2006, OCR issued a “Dear Colleague” letter 

to more than 20,000 local education agencies 

(LEAs), state education agencies (SEAs) and postsecondary schools. The letter to these recipients 

reaffirmed the importance of their Title IX responsibilities to take immediate and effective steps to 

end sexual harassment when it occurs, to prevent its recurrence and to remedy its effects.

Longstanding legal authority establishes that 

harassment of students can be a form of sex discrimination covered by Title IX. I want to commend the efforts many of you have made to ensure 

that all students have a safe and secure educational 

environment that affords them equal educational 

opportunities regardless of their sex. ... Preventing and remedying sexual harassment in schools is 

essential to ensuring a safe environment in which 

students can learn.

 

 Assistant Secretary Stephanie Monroe

 Dear Colleague Letter, Jan. 25, 2006

I consider it my good fortune that the timing of 

things allowed me to attend the Title IX workshops 

you provided. My group session was very clear and 

informative in explaining the law and the expectations for school system employers ... To have the 

opportunity to hear more about the real-world 

application of Title IX and to be able to ask questions pertaining to my own situations or to clarify 

my own areas of confusion was great ... I was truly 

impressed with your knowledge ...

E-mail from an assistant superintendent for 

human resources and administration
Annual Report to Congress: Fiscal Year 2006

20

III. SECTION 504 OF THE Rehabilitation Act of 1973 AND TITLE II OF THE AMERI- CANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT OF 1990

Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (Section 504) prohibits discrimination on the basis 

of disability in all programs or activities that receive federal financial assistance. The Section 504 

regulations (34 C.F.R. Part 104) contain general provisions as well as more specific provisions 

addressing employment; accessibility; preschool, elementary and secondary education; postsecondary 

education; health, welfare and social services; and procedures. 

OCR also enforces Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (Title II of the ADA), 

which prohibits discrimination on the basis of disability by public entities, including public 

schools. OCR is responsible for enforcing Title II of the ADA with respect to public elementary and 

secondary education systems and institutions, public institutions of higher education and vocational 

education (other than schools of medicine, dentistry, nursing and other health-related schools), and 

public libraries. 

A. Complaint Resolutions

Resolved Through Early Complaint Resolution (ECR)

• A complaint alleged a school district failed 

to provide appropriate parking to individuals 

with mobility impairments at an elementary 

school during the time parents picked up their 

children from school. School policy required 

parents to park on the street to retrieve their 

children. This policy caused individuals with 

mobility impairments to access the school 

building by climbing a hill located in the front 

of the school. The complainant informed OCR that she observed a parent with two artificial 

limbs struggling up the hill to pick up her child after school. OCR facilitated an agreement 

between the parties that allowed individuals with disabled parking permits to enter the parking 

lot during the time it was closed to the general public. 

• A complaint alleged that an elementary school teacher failed to implement certain provisions of 

the Section 504 plan for a student with Attention Deficit Disorder (ADD) because the student 

had a high level of intelligence and because the teacher erroneously believed that the Section 

504 provisions did not apply to the student. The student’s parents, despite this dispute with the 

teacher, valued the teacher’s relationship with their daughter. OCR facilitated an early complaint 

resolution between the parties, enabling the parents to both preserve their relationship with the 

teacher and address their daughter’s educational needs.

Free Appropriate Public Education (FAPE)

Of the 5,805 complaints received by OCR in FY 2006, 3,511 complaints contained allegations of 

disability discrimination. Moreover, 1,227 of those complaints concerned the more specific issue of 

the provision of a free appropriate public education. 

Several individuals with disabilities were able to 

actually park in the handicap spots today and make 

it to the school to get their children without major 

stress of how to get there.

 Letter from the complainant
21

Annual Report to Congress: Fiscal Year 2006

• A complaint alleged there were significant 

delays in a school district’s completion of 

mental health evaluations for students with 

suspected disabilities. OCR found that, over a 

two-year period, district Individual Education 

Program teams referred 165 students for 

mental health evaluations. However, 

evaluation and placement meetings were 

completed for only 79 of those 165 students and, of those, only two were completed in a timely 

manner. The average length of time from referral to completion of the evaluation was 6.6 months 

and, for some students, the time exceeded 12 months. The district agreed to monitor all aspects 

of referrals and to develop a system to ensure evaluations would be completed on a timely basis so 

that students received appropriate education services.

• A complaint alleged that students with disabilities who rode special education buses had shorter 

school days than students without disabilities because the special education buses arrived late to 

school and left early. OCR’s investigation found that the school district’s transportation schedule 

resulted in shortened school days for special education students without Individualized Education 

Program justification for a shorter day. Some parents had to resort to driving their children to 

and from school so that they would not miss instructional time. The district agreed to revise the 

transportation schedule. The district also agreed to determine which students were entitled to 

compensatory educational services due to the shortened school days and to provide those services.

• OCR’s investigation found a district conditioned the admission of students with disabilities 

who would otherwise be eligible for admission to a non-traditional school in the district on the 

students’ waiver of special education and related services. OCR also found the school district 

denied students with disabilities admitted to the non-traditional school a free appropriate public 

education. The district agreed to revise its admission policies and procedures. It also agreed to 

provide students with disabilities the services necessary for them to receive a free appropriate 

public education. 

• A complaint alleged that a school district failed to provide to a student the occupational therapy 

and paraprofessional services specified in the student’s Individualized Education Program. In 

investigating this allegation, OCR discovered that the school district’s practice was to delay 

the start of these services at the beginning of the school year for all students with disabilities. 

The district agreed to take steps to ensure that, when education plans required related aids and 

services, the plans would be implemented and services and aids be delivered as soon as the school 

year began. 

Testing and Examination

• OCR closed the monitoring of a settlement agreement that addressed the provision of 

accommodations to persons with disabilities taking the General Education Diploma (GED) 

examination. The complaint alleged a state department of education failed to provide sufficient 

information and guidance to ensure that an application for necessary accommodation during the 

I am so grateful for all of your help and guidance. 

Thank you from the bottom of my heart. God bless 

you ... and all who look out for children.

 Letter from the complainant
Annual Report to Congress: Fiscal Year 2006

22

GED examination could be processed within a reasonable amount of time. The complaint also 

alleged that the time and effort required of applicants with disabilities to apply greatly exceeded 

the time and effort required of non-disabled persons, thereby denying students with disabilities 

an equal opportunity to take the exam. The state department of education agreed to revise 

procedures for requesting and processing accommodations for the GED examination. The state 

also provided training to test site administrators and staff of the testing service. The provision of 

accommodations now routinely takes no more than a few days, rather than the weeks or months 

it took when the complaint was filed with OCR. 

• A large school district offered free administration of the Preliminary Scholastic Assessment 

Test (PSAT) to all tenth-grade students in the district. A complaint alleged that the free test 

administration did not include certain students with disabilities and certain LEP students. 

The district acknowledged that it did not extend the same opportunities to all students, and 

voluntarily entered into a settlement agreement to offer a comparable opportunity to those 

students who had been excluded. 

Disability Harassment

• OCR found a school district failed to take 

appropriate action after a picture of a student 

with a disability appeared in the school 

yearbook with a disparaging disability-related 

nickname. The district agreed to send the 

student an acknowledgment of regret and to 

offer counseling for the student to alleviate any 

adverse effects that resulted from the incident. 

The district also agreed to institute a policy 

designed to prevent a similar incident from 

occurring in the future. 

Accessibility

• A complainant alleged that many areas of a university were physically inaccessible to her 

motorized wheel chair, including the restrooms. She alleged that the restrooms did not have 

handrails and were too narrow, requiring her to hang from the top of the restroom stall and inch 

her way to the toilet. She filed the complaint after falling in the restroom and being unable to get 

up. OCR determined there were accessibility problems at the university. The university agreed to 

make structural changes to the facility to address the violations identified by OCR.

• A complaint alleged accessibility problems at a notable high school in a large urban public school 

district. Based on OCR’s finding, the district agreed to make an entrance accessible, provide 

adequate parking for persons with disabilities, create an accessible pathway from the parking 

lots to the school building, provide access to elevators, provide access to toilets and other critical 

facilities, and relocate specialized classrooms to physically accessible classrooms. 

I have just received the report concerning the High 

School. It is a brilliantly done piece of work; you 

are to be congratulated on this great report! You 

have left NO STONE UNTURNED! Your very 

pragmatic and exacting approach to detail is magnificent. It goes all the way from elevator gates to 

stalls in a boy’s bathroom.

 Letter from the complainant
23

Annual Report to Congress: Fiscal Year 2006

B. Proactive Enforcement

Compliance Reviews 

In FY 2006, OCR resolved 13 compliance 

reviews, initiated in prior fiscal years, focused on 

eliminating barriers for postsecondary students 

with physical disabilities, including making 

residence halls, classrooms, academic buildings, 

and parking facilities accessible. 

• OCR conducted compliance reviews at 

two major universities that focused on the accessibility of their residence halls. OCR found 

compliance problems that prevented students with disabilities from accessing the residence 

halls and participating in the programs offered in them. The universities entered into resolution 

agreements with OCR to remedy the identified problems.

• Based in part on enrollment data indicating African-American students were disproportionately 

represented in special education, OCR conducted a compliance review of a school district to 

determine whether African-American students were being subjected to discrimination on the 

basis of either race or disability, with respect to referral, evaluation and placement in special 

education. OCR’s investigation found no indication of different treatment on the basis of race. 

OCR, however, did find that 15 students had been placed in special education without meeting 

established criteria for special education eligibility. The district agreed to convene education 

planning meetings for each of the 15 students, conduct necessary re-evaluations, make eligibility 

decisions consistent with established standards and procedures and in accordance with applicable 

law, and provide to any of the 15 students removed from special education as a result of the 

re-evaluation appropriate supplemental services to facilitate their successful transition into the 

general education program.

• OCR closely monitored actions taken by a school district to comply with an agreement to 

resolve compliance concerns arising from an OCR compliance review. Specifically, the district 

took actions to ensure that students were appropriately referred, evaluated and placed in special 

education programs. During the 2005–--06 school year, the district re-evaluated 61 Educable 

Mentally Disabled (EMD) students. Twenty-three of those students continued in the EMD 

classification, 16 were reclassified in a different disability category, and 22 were determined not to 

have a disability and, thus, not to need special education services. The district also is providing 

transition services to the 22 students now in the general education program. When OCR initiated 

its review in 2004, there were 242 EMD students compared to 150 in the current 2006–07 

academic year. There were 100 African-American students identified as EMD in the 2006–07 

academic year, compared to 176 when OCR initiated its compliance review in the 2004–05 

academic year.

I am pleased that the University and the Office for 

Civil Rights were able to work together to address 

the needs of students with disabilities.

 Letter from a university president
Annual Report to Congress: Fiscal Year 2006

24

Technical Assistance

As part of OCR’s proactive enforcement of 

Section 504 and Title II of the ADA, OCR 

provided numerous technical assistance 

presentations on disability issues. Disability is by 

far the most requested subject matter for OCR 

technical assistance.

OCR presented technical assistance presentations 

on the issues of students with disabilities 

transitioning from high school to college nearly 

40 times in FY 2006. There are differences 

between the rights and responsibilities of students 

with disabilities in the high school setting and 

those of students in the postsecondary education 

setting. Therefore, OCR has taken proactive steps to provide students with information to make 

this transition effectively. In FY 2006, OCR presented technical assistance on this transition from 

high school to college at high schools, college fairs, postsecondary institutions and conferences. For 

example, OCR participated in five student leadership conferences sponsored by a state department 

of education, at which OCR informed students about the importance of recognizing the differences 

between their rights in high school and their rights in college. Approximately 300 students, teachers, 

administrators and parents attended each conference. OCR also presented transition information at a 

disability symposium at which there were approximately 230 administrators, faculty and students in 

attendance from over 60 colleges and universities. 

In FY 2006, OCR provided technical assistance on over 30 occasions regarding the requirements 

under Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 in the public elementary and secondary school 

context. OCR provided this presentation to over 350 educators in one state. The participants stated 

that they would be able to use the information shared by OCR throughout the state and expressed 

interest in future OCR presentations. OCR also presented this technical assistance in smaller 

settings, for example, presentations to several classes of undergraduate students. 

In addition to the presentations discussed above, OCR provided disability-related technical 

assistance in FY 2006 on issues such as assistive technology, academic adjustments and auxiliary aids, 

accessibility and disability harassment. OCR provided over 110 presentations that focused entirely 

or partially on disability issues in FY 2006.

C. Regulatory and Policy Development

On July 19, 2006, OCR issued correspondence to a large state department of education, addressing 

how disability civil rights requirements govern school references to student disabilities on report 

cards and transcripts. The correspondence, signed by Assistant Secretary Stephanie Monroe and 

written to a high-ranking official of one of the country’s largest public education systems, articulates 

key civil rights principles relevant to disability references placed on such student-specific school 

reporting documents. In order to provide more comprehensive information to state officials, OCR’s 

July 19, 2006, correspondence not only addressed the OCR-enforced requirements of Section 504 
25

Annual Report to Congress: Fiscal Year 2006

and Title II of the ADA, but also provided information about the Individuals with Disabilities 

Education Act (IDEA), which is administered within the Department by the Office of Special 

Education and Rehabilitative Services (OSERS).

IV. THE Age Discrimination Act OF 1975

The Age Discrimination Act of 1975 (the Age Act) generally prohibits discrimination on the basis of 

age in programs or activities that receive federal financial assistance. ED’s regulations implementing 

the Age Act are codified at 34 C.F.R. Part 110 and state that no person in the United States shall, 

on the basis of age, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to 

discrimination under any program or activity receiving federal financial assistance. 

OCR received 352 complaints of age discrimination in FY 2006. Of these, 86 were “age-only” 

complaints and 266 were “multiple bases” complaints. Of the 352 complaints received, 203 were 

processed in OCR and 149 were referred to other federal agencies for processing as appropriate. 

Issues surrounding allegations of discrimination on the basis of age vary. The most frequently 

cited issues involving students include “treatment of beneficiary” (61 complaints); “admission to 

education programs” (45 complaints); “academic evaluation/grading” (27 complaints); “discipline” 

(17 complaints); “student rights-retaliation/harassment (12 complaints); and “support servicescounseling/housing/financial assistance” (12 complaints).

V. THE Boy Scouts of America Equal Access Act

On March 24, 2006, OCR published final regulations implementing the Boy Scouts of America 

Equal Access Act (the Boy Scouts Act ) in the Federal Register. The Boy Scouts Act, part of the No 

Child Left Behind Act of 2001, applies to any public elementary school, public secondary school, 

LEA or SEA that has a designated open forum or limited public forum and that receives funds made 

available through ED. Under the Boy Scouts Act, these entities may not deny equal access or a fair 

opportunity to meet to, or discriminate against, any group officially affiliated with the Boy Scouts of 

America or any other youth group listed in Title 36 of the United States Code (as a patriotic society) 

that wishes to conduct a meeting within the covered entity’s designated forum. The law gives ED, 

through OCR, responsibility for ensuring that the Boy Scouts and other covered youth groups have 

equal access to public school facilities.

On Oct. 19, 2004, the secretary of education published a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM), 

requesting public comment on proposed regulations for the Boy Scouts Act. The 45-day period for 

public comment closed on Dec. 3, 2004. OCR received over 3,000 comments. After extensive 

review by DOJ and OMB of ED’s draft of the final regulations based on its review of the comments, 

ED issued the final Boy Scouts Act regulations on March 24, 2006.

One of the Boy Scouts Act’s regulatory provisions, at 34 CFR §108.8, concerns assurances of 

compliance with the act. An applicant for funds made available through ED to which the Boy 

Scouts Act applies must submit an assurance that the applicant will comply with the act and its 

regulations. In order to collect these assurances of compliance with the Boy Scouts Act, OCR 

amended the form OCR uses to collect assurances of compliance with other laws enforced by OCR. 

That form (now called “Assurance of Compliance—Civil Rights Certificate”) includes language 

by which the applicant assures that it will comply with Title VI, Title IX, Section 504, the Age 

Discrimination Act, and the Boy Scouts Act, as well as all regulations, guidelines and standards 
Annual Report to Congress: Fiscal Year 2006

26

adopted under these statutes. In FY 2006, OCR secured OMB approval to collect the revised 

Assurance of Compliance—Civil Rights Certificate. On July 21, 2006, OCR issued a “Dear 

Colleague” letter to more than 17,000 SEAs and LEAs providing information about the Boy Scouts 

Act and the requirement to provide new signed assurances of compliance with all the civil rights 

laws, regulations, guidelines and standards as a condition of continued receipt of funding from ED. 

OCR began collecting and documenting the receipt of newly signed assurances of compliance from 

these 17,000 recipients in August 2006, and will take action to follow-up with recipients that do not 

complete and return them.

A. Complaint Resolution

In FY 2006, OCR received seven complaints containing allegations of violations of the Boy Scouts 

Act. In FY 2006, OCR resolved eight complaints that contained allegations involving the Boy Scouts 

Act. Several of the Boy Scouts Act complaints received prior to issuance of the regulations did not 

present factual situations covered by the act. OCR expects that its issuance of the Boy Scouts Act 

regulations in March 2006 will assist the public in better understanding the provisions of the Boy 

Scouts Act.

VI. OTHER PROGRAM MANDATES AND ACTIVITIES

A. Magnet Schools Assistance Program (MSAP)

The Magnet Schools Assistance Program (MSAP), administered by ED’s Office of Innovation and 

Improvement (OII), provides financial assistance to school districts seeking to improve education 

programs and to reduce, prevent or eliminate minority group isolation. The program provides threeyear grants for the enhancement or establishment of magnet schools. The MSAP statute expressly 

requires that the assistant secretary for civil rights determine whether applicant school districts 

will meet nondiscrimination assurances specified in the MSAP statute. OCR also assesses whether 

applicants’ MSAP plans are consistent with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

In FY 2006, OCR reviewed and certified 52 school districts as meeting their MSAP civil rights 

assurances. It reduced the average processing time of these reviews by 33 percent as compared 

with FY 2005, enabling OII to more quickly deliver MSAP funding to these districts. In addition, 

OCR provided technical assistance to several MSAP recipients to help them comply with the civil 

rights statutes. 

B. Vocational Education Methods of Administration

OCR oversees the civil rights compliance programs of 68 state agencies that administer vocational 

education at the secondary and postsecondary levels. Under the Guidelines for Eliminating 

Discrimination and Denial of Services on the Basis of Race, Color, National Origin, Sex, and Handicap

in Vocational Education Programs (Appendix B of the Title VI regulation), OCR leverages state 

agency resources to enhance compliance by school districts and community colleges that provide 

career and technical education. To guide and assist state agencies in their civil rights compliance 

activities, OCR conducts annual training conferences, provides case-specific technical assistance, 

evaluates state agency compliance reports, and provides individualized recommendations for 

improvement of state agency compliance programs. The 68 state agencies conduct approximately 350 
27

Annual Report to Congress: Fiscal Year 2006

comprehensive compliance reviews annually, and approximately 80 percent of these reviews result in 

corrective action. As a result of the training, guidance and technical assistance that OCR provides to 

the state agencies, these agencies have steadily improved the quality of their compliance reviews and 

findings and the adequacy of the resulting remedies. 

C. Minority-Serving Institutions 

In April 2006, OCR published new lists of minority-serving institutions on a redesigned Web 

site and provided technical assistance to callers. OCR provides these lists solely as a service to the 

public. None of the lists are necessarily a complete listing of all colleges and universities that might 

fall within a particular category. Whether or not an institution of higher education appears on one 

of these lists, that institution is responsible for establishing its eligibility for a particular grant or 

contract competition, or other benefit, with ED or any other federal agency.

D. Gulf Coast Hurricanes Displacement Initiative

The summer of 2005 brought with it 

hurricanes Katrina, Wilma and Rita and the 

most severe and deadly hurricane season in the 

history of the United States. The immediate 

devastation accompanying those hurricanes 

along the Gulf Coast region also presented 

longer-term challenges, including—for 

parents, students and educators—the challenge 

of how students displaced from their home 

school districts by the hurricanes would be 

educated. Because of these events, many 

school districts were placed in a position of 

having to accept students who could not 

attend schools in their former school districts 

because of the disasters. These school districts 

had to cope with the aftermath of a natural disaster, which affected parents, students, teachers, 

administrators and others who are responsible for educating children. In some instances, parents 

sought assistance in determining their rights and those of their children in the new school districts 

where they resided. In addition, school district administrators also inquired about their roles and 

responsibilities in educating displaced students. To address some of these concerns, OCR committed 

to collaborate with state departments of education in addressing the education needs of these newly 

displaced students. OCR contacted the SEAs to obtain information concerning the enrollment 

and provision of education services to displaced students and the unique needs faced by the LEAs 

(for example, services for LEP students and students with disabilities, and assignment to schools). 

Based on this information, OCR has been working in collaboration with SEA officials and at the 

local school level with school district personnel and parents in providing technical assistance. OCR 

provided information to parents, school administrators, teachers and parent-teacher associations 

to ensure school programs were accessible to all students displaced by the hurricanes and operated 

consistent with civil rights laws and regulations. 
Annual Report to Congress: Fiscal Year 2006

28

 VII. TECHNOLOGY

In FY 2006, OCR continued a concerted effort to create a paperless office environment, which 

would contribute to the effectiveness and efficiency with which OCR carries out its mission.

A. Case and Activity Management System

OCR’s Case and Activity Management System (CAMS) builds on OCR’s existing Case Management 

System (CMS). CMS includes case management capabilities for maintaining, managing and 

tracking OCR complaints, compliance reviews and proactive activities, such as technical assistance. 

In FY 2005, OCR began development of augmented capabilities that will allow for automated 

tracking of other OCR activities carried out by the Program Legal Group in OCR headquarters, 

including such activities as general legal and policy guidance, case-specific legal and policy guidance, 

and responses to information requests from the public. CAMS also includes an integrated Document 

Management (DM) system, which enables electronic storage of a wide range of OCR work products. 

Several civil rights offices in other federal agencies have contacted OCR for information on CAMS 

and are considering developing similar systems.

OCR also is developing, with partial implementation piloted in FY 2006, a comprehensive, 

automated OCR Policy Repository. This repository will provide OCR staff, for the first time, with 

a single, centralized, electronic source of current OCR policy documents—all readily accessible 

and easily searchable. OCR is also in the process of conducting the first comprehensive review of 

documents in OCR’s current policy collection in over 10 years, to ensure that internal customers can 

quickly access updated and reliable policy information. 

OCR has developed performance measures to gauge the effectiveness of its CAMS, including a 

measure capturing the percentage of OCR resolution documents that are available electronically via 

CAMS’s Document Management system. As the chart below shows, the percentage of documents 

available continues to increase rapidly, ensuring that all OCR staff across the nation have quick and 

easy desktop access to important case resolution documents. 

 Table 3. Percentage of Final Case Resolution Documents Accessible to 

 OCR Staff via CAMS’ Document Management System

 FY 2006 98%

 FY 2005 73%

 FY 2004 61%

B. Civil Rights Data Collection

OCR’s former biennial Elementary and Secondary Schools Survey has now been merged with the 

Department’s Educational Data Exchange Network (EDEN), a central repository of information on 

K–12 programs, including No Child Left Behind Act data. For the first time in 2004, civil rights data 

were collected through the Supplemental Survey Tool Civil Rights Data Collection, which will assist 

EDEN in developing a data system with the capability to collect district- and school-level data from 
29

Annual Report to Congress: Fiscal Year 2006

school districts that integrates civil rights and other data, including essential data related to the No 

Child Left Behind Act. 

The Civil Rights Data Collection (CRDC) is primarily Web-based. For the 2004 CRDC, the initial 

year of the Web-based data collection, approximately two-thirds of the districts reporting (4,000 out 

of 6,000) were successful in using the new Web-based tool to report their data (the other districts 

opted to use more traditional media, such as CD-ROM or paper forms, to report their 2004 data). 

The overall response rate for the 2004 data collection—95 percent of all surveyed districts and 

100 percent of large districts—is consistent with the similarly high response rate for previous OCR 

surveys. Not only is this information useful to ED, the Department of Justice and other federal 

agencies, it also helps school administrators and researchers evaluate schools, and helps parents make 

better-informed education choices for their children.

In FY 2006, OCR worked with the Office of Planning, Evaluation and Policy Development 

(OPEPD) at ED to develop and adopt a transition plan to achieve the integrated collection 

and reporting of civil rights data directly through EDFacts. OCR and OPEPD also established 

the framework for implementation of the FY 2006–07 CRDC, a Web-based data collection 

of 6,000 school districts, to which OCR contributed about $2 million in FY 2006 funding. 

OCR implemented targeted CRDC improvements including, for the first time in FY 2006–07, 

augmented information about student participation in Advanced Placement (AP) courses and in 

pre-Kindergarten education programs in public schools. In FY 2006, OCR also developed state and 

national projections and disseminated the civil rights data in various media, including the Web.

C. Web-Based Electronic Complaint Filing

OCR has increased the efficiency and cost effectiveness of its complaint filing process by promoting 

the use of a Web-based electronic complaint filing system. The dramatic increase in complaints 

filed using this system is testament to its customer-friendly, efficient and effective design and 

implementation. In FY 2006, over 55 percent of the nearly 6,000 complaints received were filed 

electronically. This represents a significant increase from FY 2004, when 34.4 percent of complaints 

were filed electronically.

VIII. PROMOTING MANAGEMENT EXCELLENCE

To maximize OCR’s ability to carry out its law enforcement mission in a timely and effective 

manner in light of shrinking resources and expanding demands, OCR must redouble the premium 

it places on management excellence. The processes OCR has put into place synchronize its various 

business processes and ensure communication and coordination at all levels, whether it is the way 

OCR provides customer service or the way it manages its human resources and carries out its fiscal 

responsibilities. In 2006, OCR further reinforced these goals by ensuring accountability through 

improved performance plans of managers and staff and by putting in place a process where strategic 

goals and priorities are regularly communicated to staff at all levels in teleconferences and face-toface meetings. To encourage coordination, collaboration and consistency, the assistant secretary for 

civil rights launched a leadership agenda that included visits to all 12 regional offices, two national 

directors’ meetings, a national chief attornies’ meeting, a senior leadership retreat, and a national 

managers’ conference. The national managers’ conference brought together approximately 100 

OCR managers from each of OCR’s regional offices and headquarters for the first time in OCR 
Annual Report to Congress: Fiscal Year 2006

30

history. The agenda included up-to-date training on the latest management and leadership strategies 

as well as various discussions about how to improve OCR’s current case investigation, resolution and 

coordination processes. The following illustrates OCR’s efforts in FY 2006 to promote management 

excellence throughout the various mission-critical business processes in OCR. 

A. Customer Service

Effective civil rights enforcement in education requires that the public as well as education 

institutions understand the legal regulatory requirements and that students, parents, educators and 

other members of the public understand their rights. To meet these goals, OCR makes its guidance 

available in many different media, including through the Internet, and updates and augments that 

guidance regularly to ensure it reflects current developments. OCR also serves the public through its 

national toll-free customer service line. In FY 2006, OCR responded to over 5,407 hotline phone 

inquiries, an 8 percent increase over FY 2005. OCR responds to written requests from Congress, 

other federal agencies, state agencies, education institutions at all levels and others. In FY 2006, 

OCR provided written and oral guidance in response to tens of thousands of inquiries, and exceeded 

ED’s goal of a 10-day average for responding to controlled secretarial correspondence.

OCR also carried out its customer service responsibilities through its work involving the Freedom 

of Information Act (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. § 552, and the Privacy Act of 1974, 5 U.S.C. §552. The FOIA

was enacted in 1966 and generally provides that any person has the right to request access to federal 

agency records. The Privacy Act, a companion to the FOIA, also regulates federal government agency 

recordkeeping and disclosure practices. Under these two acts, persons (e.g., complainants, students, 

parents, school districts, colleges, universities and the media) have the right to request access to, or 

copies of, records maintained by OCR. OCR reviews and responds to the requests, consistent with 

the Department’s FOIA and Privacy Act regulations. 

Each year, OCR receives a significant number of such requests, which are processed in OCR’s 

headquarters and regional offices. OCR devotes considerable resources to meeting the requirements 

of these laws and to providing timely and effective access to information to the public. In FY 2006, 

OCR received a combined total of 898 FOIA and Privacy Act requests. As the chart below shows, this 

high number of requests has been fairly constant over the years.

 Figure 9. Number of FOIA Requests Received by OCR, FY 2000–06

Number of FOIA Requests Received by OCR, FY 2000-06

1013

915

1040 993 944

839 898

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

FY 2000 FY 2001 FY 2002 FY 2003 FY 2004 FY 2005 FY 2006

Number of 

requests

Fiscal Year
31

Annual Report to Congress: Fiscal Year 2006

To further customer service with respect to FOIA and Privacy Act requests, OCR has been a 

significant participant in the Department’s initiative to automate case management under these laws. 

Executive Order 13392, “Improving Agency Disclosure of Information,” issued on Dec. 14, 2005, 

emphasizes the need for more efficient and effective processing of FOIA and Privacy Act requests. 

OCR is committed to producing tangible and measurable improvements in processing them and, in 

FY 2006, OCR successfully piloted FOIAXpress, the Department’s Web-based solution for FOIA and 

Privacy Act case management, in two of its enforcement offices and in headquarters. By the end of 

summer 2007, FOIAXpress will be fully implemented in all OCR field offices and headquarters.

In addition, in FY 2006, consistent with Executive Order 13392, OCR established new FOIA

procedures, including delegation to the 12 OCR office directors of the authority of FOIA denial 

officers. This allows FOIA requests to be processed in a more efficient and timely manner, and 

establishes clear accountability for FOIA processing. 

B. Staff Training and Development

In FY 2006, OCR began developing a national training program that facilitates consistent highquality work across all OCR’s offices. OCR assessed core competencies, staff training needs to meet 

those competencies, substantive training resources, and vehicles for delivery of training. The national 

training program will address a full range of training needs for both new and experienced staff. In 

FY 2006, both headquarters and field office briefings were conducted on substantive and procedural 

issues. For example, through a nationwide videoconference on April 20, 2006, OCR staff was trained 

on the Boy Scouts Act and the need for all SEAs and LEAs to sign new assurances of compliance with 

the civil rights laws. OCR’s field offices also conducted comprehensive multi-day training of all 

new attorneys in fundamental and emerging legal issues and the conduct of investigations. OCR 

field staff also received training on OCR’s revised Case Resolution and Investigation Manual, which 

contains the procedural standards for conducting investigations as well as training on substantive 

programmatic issues. OCR continues to conduct periodic investigation and policy training for all 

new staff.

In addition, in FY 2006, OCR funded and launched a Web-based training initiative. OCR’s first 

Web-based training, in the final stages of production, will provide staff investigative training on civil 

rights issues including disability discrimination, retaliation and disparate treatment. 

C. Fiscal Management

In the area of financial management in FY 2006, OCR was in compliance with the federal Managers’ 

Financial Integrity Act and had no reportable conditions or material weaknesses in its financial 

accounting systems. OCR implemented internal Purchase Card (P-Card) procedures resulting in the 

reduction of the number of P-Card charges over 60 days old from 34 ($17, 245) in July 2005 to 0 in 

July 2006. 

D. Human Capital Planning 

During the past decade, FY 1996 through FY 2006, OCR’s complaint receipts rose by 20 percent, 

from 4,828 in 1996 to 5,805 in 2006. However, OCR’s FTE has steadily declined over the years, 

from 744 in FY 1996 to 630 in 2006—a decrease of 15 percent. This represents the smallest number 

of staff and nearly the largest number of complaints received in OCR’s history.
Annual Report to Congress: Fiscal Year 2006

32

One way OCR has addressed the gap between the higher workload and the smaller number of 

staff has been to develop a systematic and strategic approach for managing its human capital that 

includes a rigorous recruitment and hiring process, development of a national training program, 

and performance appraisal standards that clearly recognize and distinguish among levels of 

employee performance. 

With respect to hiring, OCR widely recruits from a range of sources that offer a large pool of 

qualified candidates. A panel, comprising knowledgeable OCR staff, reviews all resumes and 

conducts first-round interviews only of well-qualified applicants. The panel recommends the most 

highly qualified applicants for a second-round interview. Only applicants with the most excellent 

credentials are offered positions. As a result of this highly selective process in FY 2006, OCR’s new 

employees have made strong and effective additions to the offices. 

In the area of employee performance appraisals in FY 2006, OCR ranked among the most exacting 

of offices in the Department in terms of scrutinizing employee performance under the Department’s 

Performance Appraisal System (EDPAS.) Notably, OCR received recognition within the Department 

for the clear distinctions it has made in the assessment of levels of employee performance, from the 

“Unsuccessful” level of performance to the “Outstanding” level of performance. For employees 

whose performance is less than “Successful,” steps are taken to improve or enhance performance to 

bring it to the “Successful” level. 
33

Annual Report to Congress: Fiscal Year 2006

LOOKING AHEAD

Enforcing federal civil rights laws is critical to carrying out the mission of ED. They protect millions 

of students seeking to attend or attending education institutions. OCR helps ensure that all students, 

regardless of ethnicity, race, gender, disability or age, receive a quality education. 

As a law enforcement agency, OCR’s primary responsibility is to make sure institutions receiving federal 

financial assistance are in compliance with federal civil rights laws. Accordingly, its primary objective 

will continue to be prompt and efficient investigation of complainants’ allegations of discrimination, 

accurate determination of whether the civil rights laws and regulations have been violated, and securing 

an appropriate remedy for any violation. Additionally, OCR will continue proactive enforcement efforts 

through compliance reviews and targeted technical assistance. OCR staff will continue to provide 

assistance to schools, train school administrators, and help parents and students understand their rights 

under the laws it enforces. To provide quality assistance to both the public and recipients of federal 

funds, OCR is also committed to continued policy and regulatory development. 

Over the past decade, OCR’s complaint receipts have risen 20 percent, from 4,828 to 5,805. The 

only way to ensure that enforcement activities continue at the highest quality is to further develop 

and increase the knowledge and capability of OCR staff. In response to this increased workload, 

Assistant Secretary Stephanie Monroe will look to provide additional substantive training for OCR 

employees. Professional development, increased communication and nationwide coordination are 

just a few of the ways OCR will work to maintain operational excellence. 

OCR is dedicated also to assisting the Department in building on the success of No Child Left 

Behind. The success of this landmark legislation is clear. As Department data indicate, achievement 

gaps in reading and math between 

African-American and Hispanic 9-

year olds and their peers have fallen 

to all-time lows. As the Department 

works to reauthorize No Child Left 

Behind, OCR will continue to 

vigorously enforce civil rights laws 

and promote the principle that all 

students deserve equal access to 

educational excellence at all levels, 

elementary and secondary as well as 

postsecondary. Although OCR has 

achieved a a great deal over the last 

year, it is clear that much still needs 

to be accomplished, by both OCR 

and by the education community as 

a whole. 
Annual Report to Congress: Fiscal Year 2006

34

 

CONNECTICUT, MAINE, MASSACHUSETTS, 

NEW HAMPSHIRE, RHODE ISLAND, VERMONT

Office for Civil Rights, Boston Office

U.S. Department of Education

33 Arch St., Suite 900

Boston, MA 02110-1491

Telephone: 617-289-0111; Fax: 617-289-0150

E-mail: OCR.Boston@ed.gov

ILLINOIS, INDIANA, IOWA, MINNESOTA, 

NORTH DAKOTA, WISCONSIN

Office for Civil Rights, Chicago Office

U.S. Department of Education 

Citigroup Center

500 W. Madison St., Suite 1475

Chicago, IL 60661

Telephone: 312-730-1560; Fax: 312-730-1576

E-mail: OCR.Chicago@ed.gov

NEW JERSEY, NEW YORK, PUERTO RICO, 

VIRGIN ISLANDS

Office for Civil Rights, New York Office

U.S. Department of Education

32 Old Slip, 26th Floor 

New York, NY 10005-2500

Telephone: 646-428-3900; Fax: 646-428-3843

E-mail: OCR.NewYork@ed.gov

MICHIGAN, OHIO

Office for Civil Rights, Cleveland Office

U.S. Department of Education

600 Superior Ave. East, Suite 750

Cleveland, OH 44114-2611

Telephone: 216-522-4970; Fax: 216-522-2573

E-mail: OCR.Cleveland@ed.gov

DELAWARE, MARYLAND, KENTUCKY, 

PENNSYLVANIA, WEST VIRGINIA

Office for Civil Rights, Philadelphia Office

U.S. Department of Education

The Wanamaker Building

100 Penn Square East, Suite 515

Philadelphia, PA 19107-3323

Telephone: 215-656-8541; Fax: 215-656-8605

E-mail: OCR.Philadelphia@ed.gov

KANSAS, MISSOURI, NEBRASKA, OKLAHOMA, 

SOUTH DAKOTA

Office for Civil Rights, Kansas City Office

U.S. Department of Education

8930 Ward Parkway, Suite 2037

Kansas City, MO 64114-3302

Telephone: 816-268-0550; Fax: 816-823-1404

E-mail: OCR.KansasCity@ed.gov

ALABAMA, FLORIDA, GEORGIA, TENNESSEE 

Office for Civil Rights, Atlanta Office

U.S. Department of Education

61 Forsyth St. S.W., Suite 19T70 

Atlanta, GA 30303-3104

Telephone: 404-562-6350; Fax: 404-562-6455

E-mail: OCR.Atlanta@ed.gov

ARIZONA, COLORADO, NEW MEXICO, UTAH, 

WYOMING

Office for Civil Rights, Denver Office

U.S. Department of Education 

Cesar E. Chavez Memorial Building, Suite 310

1244 Speer Boulevard

Denver, CO 80204-3582

Telephone: 303-844-5695; Fax: 303-844-4303

E-mail: OCR.Denver@ed.gov

ARKANSAS, LOUISIANA, MISSISSIPPI, TEXAS 

Office for Civil Rights, Dallas Office

U.S. Department of Education

1999 Bryan St., Suite 1620

Dallas, TX 75201-6810

Telephone: 214-661-9600; Fax: 214-661-9587

E-mail: OCR.Dallas@ed.gov

CALIFORNIA 

Office for Civil Rights, San Francisco Office

U.S. Department of Education

50 Beale Street, Suite 7200

San Francisco, CA 94105

Telephone: 415-486-5555; Fax: 415-486-5570

E-mail: OCR.SanFrancisco@ed.gov

NORTH CAROLINA, SOUTH CAROLINA, VIRGINIA, 

WASHINGTON, D.C. 

Office for Civil Rights, District of Columbia Office

U.S. Department of Education

1100 Pennsylvania Ave., N.W., Room 316

P.O. Box 14620 

Washington, DC 20044-4620

Telephone: 202-786-0500; Fax: 202-208-7797

E-mail: OCR.DC@ed.gov

 

ALASKA, AMERICAN SAMOA, GUAM, HAWAII, 

IDAHO, MONTANA, NEVADA, OREGON,

WASHINGTON AND NORTHERN 

MARIANA ISLANDS 

Office for Civil Rights, Seattle Office

U.S. Department of Education

915 Second Ave., Room 3310

Seattle, WA 98174-1099

Telephone: 206-220-7900; Fax: 206-220-7887

E-mail: OCR.Seattle@ed.gov

APPENDIX A: OFFICES AND ADDRESSES

U.S. Department of Education

Office for Civil Rights

400 Maryland Ave. S.W.

Washington, DC 20202-1100

Customer Service: 800-421-3481 • TDD: 877-521-2172 • Fax: 202-245-6840

http://www.ed.gov/ocr
35

Annual Report to Congress: Fiscal Year 2006

 FY 2006 Complaint Receipts by OCR Enforcement Offices

Race/National

OCR OFFICE Origin Sex Disability Age Multiple Other Total

Boston 43 13 216 2 27 27 328

 New York 88 73 298 10 73 52 594

 Philadelphia 63 22 245 10 50 43 433

 District of Columbia 67 20 235 6 49 37 414

 Atlanta 163 37 326 11 82 111 730

 Dallas 121 43 280 7 69 57 577

 Chicago 107 28 304 9 96 63 607

 Cleveland 64 20 190 3 36 24 337

 Kansas City 66 14 197 4 54 32 367

 Denver 55 9 168 5 46 56 339

 San Francisco 114 27 366 10 123 91 731

 Seattle 47 28 200 9 45 19 348

 National 998 334 3,025 86 750 612 5,805

APPENDIX B: FY 2006 COMPLAINT RECEIPTS, BY JURISDICTION 

AND OCR ENFORCEMENT OFFICE
Annual Report to Congress: Fiscal Year 2006

36

APPENDIX C: SAMPLE OF OCR TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE PUBLICATIONS 

AVAILABLE AT WWW.ED.GOV/OCR

Listed below is a sample of publications available on OCR’s Web site, including those most 

frequently requested by mail or downloaded from OCR’s Web site. How to File a Complaint With 

OCR and Ensuring Access to High-Quality Education are available in 19 languages in addition to 

English. 

• Students With Disabilities Preparing for Postsecondary Education: Know Your Rights and 

Responsibilities (English version), March 2007

• Auxiliary Aids and Services for Postsecondary Students With Disabilities: Higher Education’s 

Obligations Under Section 504 and Title II of the ADA, September 2004

• Ensuring Equal Access to High-Quality Education (English version), September 2004 (also available 

in Spanish, Chinese, Vietnamese, Hmong, Haitian Creole, Farsi, Hindi, Laotian, Serbo-Croatian, 

Swahili, Arabic, French, Amharic, Punjabi, Somali, Tagalog, Korean, Russian, and Urdu)

• Asegurar la igualdad de acceso a educación de alta calidad (Ensuring Equal Access to High-Quality 

Education) (Spanish version), September 2004

• Preparación para la educación postsecundaria para los estudiantes con discapacidades: Conozca sus 

derechos y responsabilidades (Students With Disabilities Preparing for Postsecondary Education ...) 

(Spanish version), May 2007

• How to File a Discrimination Complaint With the Office for Civil Rights, September 2005 (also 

available in Spanish, Chinese, Vietnamese, Hmong, Haitian Creole, Farsi, Hindi, Laotian, 

Serbo-Croatian, Swahili, Arabic, French, Amharic, Punjabi, Somali, Tagalog, Korean, Russian, 

and Urdu)

• Transition of Students With Disabilities to Postsecondary Education: A Guide for High School 

Educators, March 2007

• Federal Register: Wednesday, Oct. 25, 2006: Part III: Department of Education: 34 CFR Part 

106: Nondiscrimination on the Basis of Sex in Education Programs or Activities Receiving Federal 

Financial Assistance, Final Rule 

• U.S. Department of Education, Office for Civil Rights: 2005 Annual Report to Congress, 

October 2006

• Student Placement in Elementary and Secondary Schools and Section 504 and Title II of the 

Americans with Disabilities Act, August 1998 
The Department of Education’s mission is to promote student achievement and preparation

 for global competitiveness by fostering educational excellence and ensuring equal access.

www.ed.gov

xii