U.S. Department of Education

Office for Civil Rights

2012

Helping to Ensure

Equal Access To

Education

Report to the President and 

Secretary of Education 

Under Section 203(b)(1) of the 

Department of Education Organization Act

FY 2009–12

REPORT

Helping to Ensure EqualAccess

to Education 

Report to the President and 

Secretary of Education 

Under Section 203(b)(1) of the 

Department of Education 

Organization Act

FY 2009–12

U.S. Department of Education 

Office for Civil Rights 

2012
Office

f

o

r

Civil

Rights

U.S. Department of Education

Office for Civil Rights

Russlynn H. Ali

Assistant Secretary

November 2012

This report is submitted under Section 203(b)(1) of the Department of Education 

Organization Act of 1979, Pub. L. No. 96-88, which provides that the assistant 

secretary for civil rights shall make a report to the secretary of education and the 

president “summarizing the compliance and enforcement activities of the Office for 

Civil Rights and identifying significant civil rights or compliance problems as to which 

such Office has made a recommendation for corrective action and as to which, in 

the judgment of the Assistant Secretary, adequate progress is not being made.” 

20 U.S.C. §3413(b)(1). 

This report is in the public domain. Authorization to reproduce it in whole or in part 

is granted. The report’s citation should be: U.S. Department of Education, Office for 

Civil Rights, Helping to Ensure Equal Access to Education: Report to the President 

and Secretary of Education, Under Section 203(b)(1) of the Department of Education 

Organization Act, FY 2009 –12, Washington, D.C., 2012.

To order copies of this publication, you may write to: 

 ED Pubs

 Education Publications Center

 U.S. Department of Education

 P.O. Box 22207

 Alexandria, VA 22304

You may fax your order to: 1-703-605-6794 or send an e-mail request to: 

edpubs@edpubs.ed.gov. You may also call toll-free: 1-877-433-7827 (1-877-4-EDPUBS). If 877 service 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, go to: http://www.edpubs.gov.

This report is also available on the Office for Civil Rights website at 

http://www.ed.gov/ocr. Any updates to this report will be available at this website. 

On request, this report is also available in alternate formats, such as Braille, 

large print, or CD. For more information, please contact the Department’s Alternate 

Format Center at 1-202-260-0852 or 1-202-260-0818.
iii

Helping

t

o

Ensure

Equal

Access

t

o

Educati

o

n

Contents

Message From the Assistant Secretary ..............................................................v

Executive Summary............................................................................................vii

About OCR: An Overview....................................................................................1

Vigorously Enforcing Civil Rights Through Systemic Change, Improved 

Operations and Expanded Impact.....................................................................3

Strategically Focusing Proactive Investigations....................................................4

Revitalizing the Complaint and Investigatory Processes ......................................6

Amplifying the Impact: Technical Assistance and Outreach.................................9

OCR Policy Guidance as a Tool for Enforcement and Education ....................... 11

The Civil Rights Data Collection: A Transformed Tool to Engage Communities ......13

Improved Operations to Meet OCR’s Goals .......................................................21

Maximizing Impact: Supporting Equity and Reform ...........................................23

Getting Results: Examples of Strategic Civil Rights Enforcement Activities.....25

Title VI: Discrimination on the Basis of Race, Color, and National Origin ..........25

Issue: Equal Access to Comparable Educational Opportunities (Including 

College- and Career-Preparatory Programs).................................................27

Issue: Combating Discriminatory Discipline .................................................28

Issue: Ensuring Equal Opportunities for English Learners ...........................31

Issue: Equal Rights of All Children to Attend Public School Regardless of 

Immigration or Citizenship Status..................................................................33

Issue: Supporting Schools, Districts and Colleges That Voluntarily 

Pursue Racial Diversity .................................................................................35

Issue: Enforcing Longstanding Desegregation Orders .................................38

Issue: The Right to Equal Treatment............................................................40

Cross-Cutting Issues.....................................................................................41

Title IX: Discrimination on the Basis of Sex .......................................................42

Issue: Prohibiting Sexual Assault and Violence on Campus.........................44

Issue: Equal Access to Athletic Opportunities and Benefits..........................46
iv

Office

f

o

r

Civil

Rights

Issue: Equal Access to Comparable Educational Opportunities 

(Including College- and Career-Preparatory Programs) ................................48

Section 504 and Title II: Discrimination on the Basis of Disability......................49

Issue: Free Appropriate Public Education (FAPE)........................................51

Issue: Academic Adjustments for Postsecondary Students ..........................53

Issue: Discipline ...........................................................................................54

Issue: Accessibility of Technology ................................................................55

Issue: Physical Accessibility of Programs, Services and Facilities ...............57

Cross-Cutting Issue: Combating School Harassment and Bullying ...................58

Conclusion ..........................................................................................................65
v

Helping

t

o

Ensure

Equal

Access

t

o

Educati

o

n

Message From the Assistant Secretary

At the beginning of this administration, President 

Barack Obama and Secretary of Education Arne 

Duncan set our nation on a path to once again 

lead the world in the proportion of college graduates 

by 2020. If we are to accomplish this goal, we must 

fulfill our country’s longstanding commitments to equal 

access to a high-quality education for all students, 

equitable opportunities to achieve, and the right of our 

young people to learn free from discrimination. And 

vigorously enforcing the nation’s civil rights laws is 

imperative to making those commitments real. 

While we have made great progress since the 

enactment of the civil rights laws in education—indeed, 

as Secretary Duncan has said, “The steady movement 

to a more fair and just society plays out each day in 

the classrooms, colleges, and universities all across 

America”—there remains much to be done. The Office for Civil Rights’s (OCR) 

contributions to that steady movement are described in the pages of this report. It 

shows examples of existing barriers to equal educational opportunity and OCR’s 

work to help dismantle them—removing these barriers is no longer just a moral 

imperative, but an economic necessity as well. As all of us in the Department of 

Education know, the educational status quo is simply not good enough.

From 2009 to now, OCR has investigated and resolved a record number of 

complaints and entered into robust remedies that attack discrimination at its roots. 

We have engaged in unprecedented proactive enforcement, revamped our technical 

assistance, and expanded our outreach to new levels. We have dramatically 

enhanced our case management and investigatory processes, knowledge sharing, 

performance management and accountability. The dedicated employees of OCR 

have transformed this agency in order to accomplish more than ever before.

Our challenge has been clear: in a time of increasing need, we must fulfill our 

statutory duties and live up to our historical legacy and founding purpose of 

enforcing the civil rights laws with excellence and efficiency. Over the last four 

years, OCR’s accomplishments and the work of its nearly 600-member team to 

meet this challenge have exceeded even my highest expectations. I am proud 

and honored to serve by their side. And through continued implementation of 

our strategy, and with strategic, smart and continuous improvement, and ongoing 

efficiency, I am confident we will sustain our pace and remain true to the vision 

provided by the president and secretary. 

Sincerely yours, 

Russlynn H. Ali
Office

f

o

r

Civil

Rights
vii

Helping

t

o

Ensure

Equal

Access

t

o

Educati

o

n

E

Nearly half a century after the first federal civil rights laws in education were enacted, 

the national aspiration for equity in education remains unfulfilled. This is not just a 

moral issue, but an economic one as well, offering a clear mandate to move forward 

aggressively to enforce civil rights laws and pursue the ideals of equity at the heart 

of the American dream. This report documents the breadth of the work performed 

by the roughly 600 attorneys, investigators and support staff of the U.S. Department 

of Education’s Office for Civil Rights (OCR) during fiscal years 2009 through 2012.1

 

These have been four years of transformation and dramatic impact for OCR, 

focusing on three major themes: (1) Greater Productivity to Meet a Rising Caseload; 

(2) Supporting Equity Throughout the Department; and (3) Maximum Impact, 

Maximum Engagement.

First, OCR strategically revised its enforcement approach to increase its efficiency 

and impact. Faced with an ever-growing workload, OCR developed and 

implemented new internal systems of management, performance accountability, 

professional development and support, and use of data. It dramatically enhanced 

its investigatory processes, the impact and significance of its resolutions, guidances 

and policy documents, technical assistance and data. It increased the heft of its 

monitoring capacity and the scope of the issues it addresses. It designed new ways 

to ensure continuous improvement, innovation and efficiencies. And it established 

a collaboration with each educational institution involved in a resolution, leading to 

improved, multifaceted strategies to foster organizational change and address the 

root causes of discrimination. 

Second, Secretary Duncan and leaders from OCR and throughout the Department 

of Education (the Department) have integrated OCR’s civil rights agenda and the 

Department’s broader educational reform agenda in an unprecedented manner. 

The impact of this work can be seen through, for example, OCR’s leadership role in 

the Secretary’s Equity and Excellence Commission; its membership on Secretary 

Duncan’s senior-most advisory and decision-making committees; its collaborations 

throughout the Department to ensure a focus on equity issues in waivers granted 

to states from requirements under the Elementary and Secondary Education Act 

(ESEA), proposals for reauthorizations of key legislation such as the Carl D. Perkins 

Career and Technical Education Act, and the distribution of competitive and formula 

funds. 

Third, in the past four years, OCR has comprehensively and substantively 

addressed some of the most challenging and urgent civil rights issues facing 

educational institutions today—and it has done so in conjunction with a public 

engagement strategy to maximize impact. OCR has published robust and readerfriendly policy guidance documents that provide schools and colleges with detailed 

interpretations of the laws they must follow, including concrete examples based on 

actual scenarios that educators encounter. 

1 In the federal government, a fiscal year runs from October 1 through September 30 and is identified by the calendar year in 

which it ends. Thus, “fiscal year 2012” (or “FY 2012”) ran from October 1, 2011 to September 30, 2012. Unless otherwise 

noted, years referred to in this document are fiscal years.
viii

Office

f

o

r

Civil

Rights

It has also developed an integrated, holistic approach to educating students, 

parents, community groups, and educational institutions about their rights and 

obligations. For example, OCR increased the number of outreach activities directed 

toward covered entities, parents and community groups, to an average of over 330 

activities per year in the last four years, compared with 185 in 2008. Additionally, 

OCR has empowered parents, educators and advocates across the country with 

a treasure trove of civil rights information through the new CRDC. Not only does 

the CRDC now cover issues of critical interest in every school and district, such as 

enforcement of discipline sanctions, spending on teachers, and access to collegeand career-preparatory courses, but it is now accessible to the public through a new, 

easy-to-use website, enabling everyone, from researchers to parents to teachers, 

to discover educational inequities that may be affecting students in schools and 

communities across the nation. Such information is a powerful tool for change.

OCR made all these changes while receiving and resolving more cases than ever 

before, and doing it faster. Between 2009 and 2012, OCR received 24 percent more 

cases than in the four years prior; resolved cases faster than in years past; and 

launched over 100 proactive compliance reviews, many of which address first-oftheir-kind issues, and all of which are innovative in their comprehensiveness, scope, 

and approach. 

While we have made great progress, there remains much more to do. OCR must 

continue to improve, and we are committed to doing so. We are poised to meet new 

challenges head-on and work to ensure fairness and opportunity for all young people 

in our nation’s schools. 
1

Helping

t

o

Ensure

Equal

Access

t

o

Educati

o

n

A

OCR was created in 1966 in response to Congress’s passage of Title VI of the Civil 

Rights Act of 1964. That landmark legislation was Congress’s most comprehensive 

effort since Reconstruction to use the authority of the federal government to 

eliminate discrimination on the basis of race, color and national origin.

Over the past five decades, Congress has continued to promote equal opportunity 

by requiring federally funded public and private institutions (including elementary 

and secondary schools, institutions of higher education, and other postsecondary 

programs) to eliminate invidious discrimination based on additional grounds, 

including sex, disability and age. OCR is now responsible for enforcing six separate 

federal statutes. In addition to Title VI, OCR enforces Title IX of the Education 

Amendments Act of 1972, which addresses sex discrimination; Section 504 of 

the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 and Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act, 

which address disability discrimination; the Age Discrimination Act of 1975, which 

addresses age discrimination; and the Boy Scouts of America Equal Access Act of 

2002, which addresses the rights of the Boy Scouts and certain other organizations 

relating to access to space for meetings. (See Exhibit 1.) 

Combined, these laws embody our country’s continuing commitment to equality and 

decisions based on individual merit. Their vigorous enforcement is critical to our 

nation’s long-term prosperity: fulfilling the promise of public schools in America helps 

us ensure a competitive workforce and maintain America’s standing in the global 

economy.

1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010

Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964

Title IX of the Education Amendments Act of 1972

Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973

Age Discrimination Act of 1975

Title II of the Americans with Disabilities 

Act of 1990*

Mandated

Statutes

OCR’s

Mission

“The mission of the Office for Civil Rights is to ensure equal access to education 

and to promote educational excellence throughout the nation through vigorous 

enforcement of civil rights.”

Boy Scouts of America

Equal Access Act of 2002

Exhibit 1:
2

Office

f

o

r

Civil

Rights
3

Helping

t

o

Ensure

Equal

Access

t

o

Educati

o

n

V

During the four-year period spanning FY 2009 through FY 2012, OCR engaged in a 

strategic planning process and embarked upon a series of systemic changes. The 

result has been streamlined operations and a more holistic approach to civil rights 

law enforcement, including:

► new systems for proactive and complaint-based investigations, resolution 

agreements, and aligned monitoring and compliance efforts;

► new, coordinated data systems that aid in monitoring internal progress and in 

continuously improving execution of priorities in OCR’s policy and enforcement 

work;

► frequent, strategically aligned, broad-based technical assistance activities and 

outreach efforts;

► expanded support to offices across the Department and throughout the federal 

government on matters pertaining to civil rights and educational equity, including 

intra- and inter-agency sharing of best practices; and

► enhanced policy guidance.

OCR’s strategic planning process, undertaken in early 2009, aligned OCR’s policy, 

communications and enforcement levers, and has guided refinements made 

continuously since then. As a result, OCR’s five goals have been consistently clear, 

and OCR’s staff of almost 600 dedicated lawyers, investigators, and administrative 

personnel has worked tirelessly to meet OCR’s goals with high standards for 

excellence and efficiency. Taken together, OCR’s goals provide an integrated 

approach to addressing concerns about educational equity:

Goal 1: Increase students’ and their families’ awareness of their rights, and strengthen 

their capacity to identify and resolve civil rights and equity issues in their 

communities, by strategically issuing clear “Dear Colleague” letters and other 

guidance documents, and by expanding technical assistance services.

Goal 2: Increase schools’, colleges’, and universities’ understanding of their 

obligations under civil rights laws and strengthen their capacity to make 

the vision at the heart of these laws a reality by strategically issuing 

clear “Dear Colleague” letters and other guidance documents, and by 

expanding technical assistance services.

Goal 3: Protect individual complainants’ civil rights and ensure due process by 

continuously improving the complaint investigation and resolution process.

Goal 4: Identify and eliminate any systemic violations of civil rights laws through the 

proactive and strategic use of compliance reviews and complementary tools.

Goal 5: Maximize impact over time by ensuring that all components of the 

Department are advancing civil rights and equity goals, and that OCR is 

supporting and reinforcing the Department’s strategic priorities. 
4

Office

f

o

r

Civil

Rights

Strategically Focusing Proactive Investigations

Developing a System of Aligned, Strategic, Proactive Investigations 

In the past four years, OCR launched more than 100 compliance reviews—

proactive, broad-scale, systemwide investigations of issues of strategic significance.2

 

Recognizing a need for greater coherence and strategic focus in its compliance 

review docket, OCR implemented, during this time, a collaborative, data-driven 

process to guide its attorneys and investigators through multiple steps of analysis—

including a comprehensive examination of each proposed proactive investigation 

with regard to its need and priority, causes of concern, geography, severity, impact 

and other relevant information. With coordination and support from national 

headquarters, each regional office throughout the country now annually launches 

compliance reviews that are designed to effect significant change at the target 

institutions and provide widely applicable solutions to civil rights problems faced by 

institutions elsewhere. (See Exhibit 2.) 

OCR’s compliance reviews have dealt with never-before addressed issues, keeping 

pace with emerging concerns and questions arising under the civil rights laws 

that OCR enforces, including sexual violence at the K–12 and postsecondary 

levels; comparability of resources; bullying and harassment; booster clubs and 

the distribution of athletic dollars and resources; charter schools and authorizers; 

state transportation support for students with disabilities; shortened school days; 

food allergies; access to college- and career-preparatory courses and services; 

disproportionate discipline rates; minority over-representation in special education 

programs and under-representation in talented and gifted programs; and access to 

electronic and web-based educational resources. 

Using All of the Tools Under Its Jurisdiction 

In the fall of 2010, OCR implemented an investigative approach called the “directed 

inquiry” to allow for immediate, expedited investigations of urgent and critical civil 

rights problems.3

 The directed inquiry process allows OCR to rapidly address fastmoving or exigent circumstances and has led to significant resolution agreements 

on issues such as sexual violence involving allegations of gang rape, sexual assault 

and suicide that needed to be addressed through school and college collaboration 

with local law enforcement; and bullying, harassment and sex stereotyping of 

lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) students that allegedly contributed to 

tragic student suicides. 

Guiding States in Overseeing Career and Technical Education Compliance 

Through its Methods of Administration authority, OCR oversees the civil rights 

compliance programs of 71 state agencies that are responsible for career and 

technical education across the country. Over the last four years, these agencies 

conducted over 1,200 comprehensive on-site inquiries of subrecipients and stateoperated programs that were targeted based on their potential for civil rights 

2 34 C.F.R. § 100.7(a), Periodic Compliance Reviews. 3 34 C.F.R. § 110.7(c), Investigations.
5

Helping

t

o

Ensure

Equal

Access

t

o

Educati

o

n

ELL Equal 

Opportunities 

2010

Harassment 

2011 MINSPED 2011

STEM 2011

ELL & Disabled 

Charter 2011

Discipline 2011Discipline 2012

College & Career 

Ready 

Curriculum 2010

STEM/CAREER 

2010

Athletics 

College 2011

Athletics H.S. 

2010

Discipline 2010

College & Career 

Ready 

Curriculum 2011

Discipline 2010Discipline 2012

College & Career 

Ready 

Curriculum 2011

Sexual Viol/Har. 

2010

ELL Equal 

Opportunities 

2009

ELL Equal 

Opportunities 

2009

Discipline 2009

Athletics H.S. 

2009

Athletics H.S 

2009

Sexual Viol/Har. 

2012

Accessibility 

Physical 2009

Accessibility 

Physical 2009

LEP 2010 

FAPE 2009

Athletics College 

2010

AP/STEM 2010

College & Career 

Ready 

Curriculum 2011

FAPE 2010

College & Career 

Ready 

Curriculum 2009

Discipline 2011

ELL Equal 

Opportunities 

2010 

Athletics H.S 

2011

FAPE 2010

ELL Equal 

Opportunities 

2009

Accessibility 

Physical 2009

MINSPED 2011

Harassment 

2009

FAPE/ELL/LEPCharter 2011

MINSPED 2011

FAPE 2010

ELL Equal 

Opportunities 

2009

Discipline 2010

Discipline 2012

Athletics H.S 

2010

Athletics College 

2011

Athletics H.S 

2011

Athletics College 

2009

Sexual Viol/Har 

2010

FAPE Charter 

2011

FAPE/ELL/LEPCharter 2011

Resource Comp. 

2010

STEM 2011

Athletics H.S 

2011

ELL Equal 

Opportunities 

2009

Sexual Viol/Har. 

2009

Athletics H.S 

2011

College & Career 

Ready 

Curriculum 2011

ELL Equal 

Opportunities 

2010

Athletics H.S 

2010

Athletics College 

2010

Sexual Viol/Har. 

2011

MINSPED 2010

STEM/CAREER 

2011

ELL Equal 

Opportunities 

2009

College & Career 

Ready 

Curriculum 2011

ELL/LEP 

Communication 

2010

Sexual Viol/Har. 

2011

MINSPED 2010

College & Career 

Ready 

Curriculum 2011

Discipline 2010

Resource Comp/

Teacher Equity 

2009

FAPE 2009

Segregation 

Students with 

Disabilities 

2011

ELL Charter 2011

ELL/LEP 

Communication 

2010

Discipline 2010

Grievance 

Procedures 2009

Sexual Viol/Har. 

2009

Grievance 

Procedures 2009

Discipline 2011

FAPE 2010

FAPE 2010

Discipline 

2011

ELL Equal 

FAPE 2010

Opportunities 

2010 

Discipline 2010

Discipline 2010

Sexual Viol/Har. 

2011

 Accessibility 

Website 2011

AP/STEM 2010

Discipline 2010

STEM 2009

Sexual Viol/Har. 

Discipline 2009

2009

Discipline 2011

LEP 2011

TITLE VITITLE IXSECTION 504 & TITLE II

Discipline 2012

Athletics H.S. 

2011

Harassment 

2011 

ELL Equal 

Opportunities 

2009

ELL Equal 

Opportunities 

2010

Discipline 2012

Exhibit 2: OCR Compliance Reviews, FY2009

–12*

FAPE 2009

LEP 

Communicatio

n ELL 

Counseling 

2010

Sexual Viol/

Har. 2009

Athletics H.S 

2009

*OCR conducted over 100 compliance reviews during fiscal years 2009 through 2012. A compliance review can raise multiple issues, therefore the total number of issues raised will exceed the number of compliance reviews conducted.
6

Office

f

o

r

Civil

Rights

noncompliance. About 90 percent of these inquiries resulted in corrective action 

and positive change for students on issues such as accessibility; recruitment, 

admissions, and counseling; comparable facilities; services for students with 

disabilities; financial assistance; work-study, cooperative and job placement 

programs; and employment. 

For example, under OCR’s guidance, state agencies have ensured their districts 

provide high school curriculum guides and other important information to communities 

serving limited English proficient parents and students in Spanish and other 

languages; ensured districts conduct required assessments of counseling activities 

in places where female and African-American students remain underrepresented in 

science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) programs; and ensured 

technical colleges provide accessible student stations in their career and technical 

education classes and laboratories. OCR also issued guidance documents on how 

such state agencies should document their compliance oversight work. Through 

OCR’s ongoing analyses of their work, it is clear that state agencies are making great 

impact and continuously improving the legal adequacy and findings of their compliance 

audits and the effectiveness of the resulting remedies. 

Revitalizing the Complaint and Investigatory Processes 

Over the last four years (FY 2009–12), OCR has received 28,971 complaints—more 

than in any previous four-year period in its history, and representing a 24 percent 

increase over the previous four-year period. Over half of them addressed disability 

issues, about a quarter pertained to Title VI concerns, and the remaining addressed 

sex and age discrimination, 14 percent and 6 percent respectively. (See Exhibits 3 

and 4.) During the same 

time period, OCR closed4

28,577 complaints—also 

a record. Complaint 

resolution has always 

been OCR’s primary 

function, and this growing 

volume made it all the 

more necessary that 

OCR get more effective 

and efficient in delivering 

this crucial service. 

Coordinating Support 

and Information 

Sharing 

During the past four 

years, OCR enhanced 

its capacity to ascertain 

4 OCR closes complaints through a number of means, including dismissal based on lack of jurisdiction, closure after the parties reach a mediated agreement through OCR’s Early Complaint Resolution process, or closure through a resolution agreement between the recipient and OCR, either before or after a finding of violation by OCR.

FY 03

Number 5,141

0

FY 04

5,044

FY 05

5,533

FY 06

5,805

FY 07

5,894

FY 08

6,194

FY 09

6,364

FY 10

6,933

FY 11

7,841

FY 12

7,833

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

3,000

3,500

4,000

4,500

5,000

5,500

6,000

6,500

7,000

7,500

8,000

Exhibit 3: Growing Case Load of Complaints 

Received by OCR, FY 2003–12
7

Helping

t

o

Ensure

Equal

Access

t

o

Educati

o

n

trends and emerging issues found in 

complaints, and to systematically share 

and incorporate lessons learned by 

OCR’s enforcement teams across the 

country. To do this, OCR enhanced its 

case management database system to 

better support its staff in investigating, 

closing and monitoring cases, and 

its management of the review and 

dissemination of information and the 

allocation of resources across OCR. 

Creating Powerful Resolutions and 

Sustaining Results 

The potential for benefit of any 

investigation, be it complaint-driven or 

proactive, lies in the resolution. To 

generate the maximum sustained 

impact in each case, OCR collaborates 

with the institution in question to 

identify policies and procedures that 

need to be revised and training and 

orientation programs that need to be 

provided, and to take whatever 

additional steps are necessary to 

identify and address the source of discrimination and empower and support the 

entire school or university community to eradicate it. 

OCR has achieved stronger outcomes 

by institutionalizing measures to improve 

the structure, development and content of 

each resolution agreement and to ensure 

that the remedies obtained are faithfully 

implemented. As an example, OCR staff 

and leadership across its regional offices 

developed a holistic approach to resolutions, 

always answering critical questions such 

as: Are the root causes of the discrimination 

being addressed? Are all the possible 

levers—including, for example, policy and 

program changes, training, community 

outreach, advisory groups, support and 

remediation for complainants, the use of 

climate checks, surveys, interviews and other means to garner stakeholder input, 

and frequent monitoring—being utilized? Has the agreement been developed 

collaboratively with the educational institution to design effective remedies that 

build upon the institution’s expertise and capacity, existing programs and intended 

“Every resolution of a Title IX 

investigation...[has] an impact beyond 

that particular school. We believe that 

campuses and school administrators and 

attorneys at campuses really pay attention 

and look at what other schools are being 

held accountable for.”

—– Ariela Migdal

ACLU

“Tougher Line on Sexual Harassment”

Inside HigherEd, December 10, 2010

In addition to the categories listed on the figure, 

two-tenths of a percent (.2 percent) of allegations 

received over the past four years involved 

alleged violations of the Boy Scouts of America 

Equal Access Act.

Race and National

Origin

26% Sex

14%

Disability

54%

Age

6%

Exhibit 4: Percentage of Complaints 

Received in FY 2009–12 By Type of 

Alleged Discrimination
8

Office

f

o

r

Civil

Rights

reform efforts, and to obtain the institution’s buy-in? And are provisions built into the 

resolution agreement to ensure that the remedies are faithfully implemented, and 

that OCR can act quickly to help if compliance is stalled? 

By grappling with these and other questions as a matter of course, OCR has issued 

stronger resolution agreements in hundreds of cases of over the past four years, 

and moved them from oft-described compliance-driven checklists to collaborative, 

rigorous instruments of change used by school officials across the country to align 

and monitor reform efforts. And to help ensure these resolutions yield real and 

sustained change, they now include standard provisions clarifying OCR’s authority 

to continue monitoring until the institution is in full compliance with the law and to 

pursue legal enforcement if OCR finds noncompliance. Monitoring now continues 

until the recipient is capable of taking prompt and effective steps to eliminate 

discrimination, prevent it from recurring, and, as appropriate, address its effects on 

the individual victims and the broader community, and is in compliance with the law. 

Depending on the complexity of the case and resulting agreement, monitoring can 

be brief or last for multiple years.

Fulfilling Longstanding and Unfinished Responsibilities 

While improving its approach to new complaints, OCR also set about identifying and 

resolving the large number of unfinished investigations spanning multiple years that 

existed in every regional office. In 2009 and 2010 alone, OCR closed well over 50 

such cases. 

For example, one case involving physical accessibility of a university in Ohio had 

been open since 2004. OCR worked closely with the institution and entered into 

an agreement that addressed the deficit in facilities and programs campuswide. In 

another case, opened in 2008, a district in New York that lacked the required Section 

504/ADA coordinator and was using significantly defective procedures for addressing 

the needs of students with disabilities finally revised its grievance processes and 

procedures and realigned its staff to support students with disabilities. In Arizona, 

a complaint open since 2005 was finally resolved to ensure English learners were 

no longer prematurely exited from language programs unprepared to access the 

core curriculum. And OCR resolved a 15-year-long investigation into a case on 

sex discrimination involving intercollegiate athletics programs at a major California 

university. OCR restarted the stalled investigation and negotiations and closed the 

case in 2012 after concluding that the university had come into compliance with 

regard to scholarships and athletic participation opportunities. In another example, 

OCR closed the monitoring of an agreement that had been entered into in 2001 with 

a school district in Washington on increasing opportunities for girls to play sports. 

Working with OCR, the district came into compliance by increasing the participation of 

girls in sports, while simultaneously sustaining its teams and participation opportunities 

for boys. It achieved this result in part by developing outreach activities at the middleschool level and a pipeline of opportunities for its girls to play sports. 
9

Helping

t

o

Ensure

Equal

Access

t

o

Educati

o

n

Amplifying the Impact: Technical Assistance and Outreach 

Even the most thoughtful and vigorous enforcement efforts alone, are insufficient to 

prevent civil rights offenses across the country. Therefore, to promote voluntary and 

proactive compliance with the civil rights laws, OCR has improved the information 

and other support services—i.e., technical assistance—it provides to institutions and 

individuals across the country. OCR has also undertaken a systematic, strategic and 

organized approach to building a comprehensive, proactive technical assistance and 

outreach docket. 

Helping Recipients Understand Obligations 

A major element in improving technical assistance has been increased transparency, 

with communications along multiple channels with recipients and the public. For 

example, OCR now translates its key documents into multiple languages and posts 

its resolution agreements to provide concrete models that institutions can use to 

meet their obligations and stave off potential problems. 

Complementing its written communications efforts, OCR’s regional offices routinely 

provide technical assistance outreach to educational institutions. From FY 2009 

through FY 2012, OCR made over 1,325 technical assistance presentations to 

various constituencies—an average of over 330 presentations per year—compared 

with 185 presentations given in FY 2008. 

Technical assistance includes on-site consultations with recipients, conferences, 

community meetings, webinars, widespread dissemination of policies and other 

information, and responses to thousands of written inquiries and questions via 

OCR’s telephone hotline. During the last four years, OCR has developed and 

carried out a strategic, proactive outreach program to ensure that critical civil 

rights information is reaching the broadest possible segment of the education 

community—including state and local agencies, communities that may be isolated, 

disenfranchised, or otherwise lacking in effective communication resources, and the 

public at large. 

Frequent technical assistance enables OCR’s constituents to learn of their rights and 

responsibilities under the civil rights laws, thereby improving civil rights compliance 

without the need for enforcement activity. With the Office of Management and 

Budget’s assistance and approval, OCR developed a new survey instrument to 

collect feedback from recipients of technical assistance in order to monitor the 

frequency and effectiveness of the assistance provided. OCR has also begun to 

provide technical assistance more efficiently and expansively through better use of 

technology. 

For example, while expanding overall the number of complicated TA initiatives and 

activities offered, OCR has designed a special initiative for “wounded warriors” that 

addresses the rights of service members who have disabilities as a result of being 

injured while on duty and who are entering or reentering postsecondary education. 

In one initiative, OCR partnered with several California community colleges, the 

California State University system, the California Department of Veterans Affairs, and 

veteran advocacy groups to provide multiple outreach seminars and workshops for 

several hundred participating students and service personnel. 
10

Office

f

o

r

Civil

Rights

Additionally, since 2009, OCR has held large-scale, multistate conferences on the 

responsibilities of schools to meet the needs of students with food allergies, juvenile 

diabetes, and other health needs. Over 400 parents and advocates attended 

regional events in New York and New Jersey alone. In Texas, parents traveled as 

far as 350 miles to attend an OCR-led workshop discussing how diabetes affects 

students during school hours and school-related functions and the corresponding 

responsibilities of schools to ensure students are safe and in school. 

In Chicago, OCR provides technical assistance to officials from across the Midwest 

at what is now its annual Chicago seminar. Since 2009, the Chicago seminar, held 

at the local OCR office for little to no cost, has brought nearly 100 state and local 

leaders and educators together in a unique, interactive and collaborative atmosphere 

to address issues they face. Building on the Chicago seminar, in 2011, three 

regional offices partnered with three of the Department-funded Equity Assistance 

Centers to sponsor a collaborative multiday conference for over 250 state and local 

educators, administrators, policymakers, researchers and advocates from states 

such as Alabama, Florida, Arkansas, Louisiana, Texas, North and South Carolina 

and Washington, D.C. And in Virginia, OCR has worked with the state’s Higher 

Education Leadership Partnership to conduct “transition forums,” which focus on 

the path students with disabilities take to successfully transition from high school to 

college. OCR also worked with a number of Virginia stakeholders to help plan the 

National and International Transition Forums, extending OCR’s help across district 

and regional borders, to raise awareness and share best practices for improving the 

likelihood of a successful transition to college for students with disabilities.

In addition to its proactive technical assistance initiatives, in FY 2012, OCR’s 

customer service and technology team (CSTT) handled 10,162 telephone hotline 

requests—a 40% increase from the 6,045 requests received in FY 2009—and 

2,574 pieces of correspondence from the public, up nearly 300 letters and emails 

from 2009. CSTT also coordinates the distribution of OCR guidance documents 

and publications and handles Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests—

approximately 100 in FY 2012, while OCR’s regional offices managed around 1,000 

additional FOIA requests during the same time period. OCR’s customer service 

processes and new procedures have been recognized within the Department for 

their rapid turnaround of controlled correspondence. For example, despite the 

substantial increase in correspondence, our response time decreased from 3.1 days 

on average in 2009 to 2.5 days in 2012. Indeed, OCR has consistently achieved 

efficient controls and timely responses, and serves as a model for the Department in 

responding to FOIA requests promptly and efficiently.

Reaching the Public 

In today’s instant, continuous, and crowded informational marketplace, OCR 

understands that to reach a diverse array of stakeholders it must constantly 

communicate with recipients and students and their families. Accordingly, OCR 

has utilized multiple channels of public engagement—including traditional and 

social media, town hall meetings, other live events, and print materials—in order to 

complement, amplify, and inform its work. OCR leadership now routinely engages 

proactively with the press and community groups in an effort to reach as many 
11

Helping

t

o

Ensure

Equal

Access

t

o

Educati

o

n

leaders, students and parents as possible. OCR also frequently meets with members 

of Congress and their staffs to provide information and address their concerns.

OCR also often engages with local communities as part of its investigations. For 

example, OCR now conducts town hall meetings, where appropriate, during its 

investigations. In one investigation, to solicit input from parents and students, OCR 

conducted a town hall meeting in Los Angeles with over 400 community members, 

which gave OCR staff and attorneys the opportunity to speak with hundreds of parents 

eager to share their experiences. 

Similarly, in Pennsylvania, as part of a 

compliance review to determine whether 

English learners had received the 

services and supports they were entitled 

to by law, including information from the 

district in a language they and their 

parents could understand, OCR 

conducted a town hall meeting with 

parents and community members to 

learn their perspectives about the 

provision of English learner services. 

During the meeting, complaints were 

filed by parents alleging unequal 

treatment of Hispanic students and their 

parents when they tried to register and enroll in school.

OCR Policy Guidance as a Tool for Enforcement and Education

Over the past four years, OCR has issued relevant and accessible policy guidance 

documents that complement OCR’s technical assistance and enforcement activities, 

and inform recipients and the public about critical and emerging issues arising under 

the laws and regulations OCR enforces. The structure and format of the guidance 

documents have been revamped to include 

application sections with multiple 

hypothetical fact scenarios showing how 

legal principles apply to the educational 

decisions constantly made by educators 

and administrators everywhere. The new 

guidance documents also avoid overly 

academic or legal language in favor of 

plain prose. 

OCR attorneys use its recent 

guidance documents as lodestars 

during investigations; school system 

administrators, school principals 

and college administrators use them 

prophylactically to prevent civil rights violations; and members of the public use them 

to better understand how these laws apply to their own lives or to the lives of their 

children, relatives, friends, and neighbors. 

OCR provided Title IX athletics technical 

assistance to a large school district, with 

attendees including the district’s equity 

compliance office and attorneys.

Due to the training’s success, the district 

asked OCR to provide similar training to all 

district athletic directors as soon as possible.

The presentations addressed a full auditorium 

of over 200 athletic directors on interscholastic 

athletic topics, with emphasis on athletic interests 

and abilities and issues such as facilities, 

equipment and supplies, and scheduling.

“The AAPD...commends the U.S. Dept. 

of Ed. for issuing broad guidance to 

[K–12] schools and institutions of higher 

education.”

—Helena Berger

CEO, American Association of People with 

Disabilities, responding to OCR’s guidance 

regarding the need for accessibility of 

emerging technologies on college and 

other campuses. 

Press release, May 26, 2011
12

Office

f

o

r

Civil

Rights

The topics addressed in the policy guidance documents, also known as “Dear 

Colleague Letters” (DCLs), have offered clear direction to schools and colleges in 

areas of pressing concern under the laws OCR enforces.

E XHIB IT 5: OCR P OLI CY G UIDAN CE 2009–12

March 3, 2009 Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) regarding disability issues to 

(Section 504/Title II) incorporate the Americans with Disabilities Amendments Act of 2008, 

effective January 1, 2009.

April 20, 2010 DCL regarding the standards for assessing compliance with Part 

(Title IX) Three of the “Three-Part Test” used to determine whether institutions 

are meeting the Title IX regulatory requirement to accommodate 

students’ athletic interests and abilities.

June 29, 2010 DCL concerning the obligation of colleges and universities to ensure 

(Section 504/Title II) that students with disabilities have equal access to emerging 

technologies in education.

October 26, 2010 DCL concerning recipients’ obligations to protect students from 

(Title IX, Title VI, student-on-student harassment on the basis of sex; race, color and 

Section 504/Title II) national origin; and disability.

April 4, 2011 DCL on Title IX requirements and how they relate to sexual 

(Title IX) harassment and sexual violence.

May 6, 2011 DCL regarding schools’ enrollment procedures explaining that Title 

(Title VI) VI and the Equal Protection Clause forbid public schools from denying

an education to children based on their citizenship or national origin.

May 26, 2011 DCL and FAQ documents to K–12 and higher educational institution 

(Section 504/Title II) regarding the use of electronic book readers and other emerging 

technologies in compliance with civil rights laws that prohibit 

discrimination on the basis of disability.

December 2, 2011 DCLs on the permissible voluntary uses of race to achieve diversity 

(Title VI) or avoid racial isolation in K-12 and postsecondary institutions.

January 11, 2012 DCL on how state Methods of Administration programs can 

(Methods of document the thoroughness of their compliance reviews.

Administration)

January 19, 2012 DCL and FAQ regarding how the Americans with Disabilities 

(Section 504/Title II) Amendments Act of 2008 affects students with disabilities attending 

public elementary and secondary schools and how OCR evaluates 

compliance with Title II of the ADA and Section 504 in light of the 

Amendments Act.

Exhibit 5: OCR POliCy GuidanCe 2009–12

March 3, 2009

(Section 504/Title II)

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) regarding disability issues to 

incorporate the Americans with Disabilities Amendments Act of 2008, 

effective January 1, 2009.

April 20, 2010

(Title IX)

DCL regarding the standards for assessing compliance with Part 

Three of the “Three-Part Test” used to determine whether institutions 

are meeting the Title IX regulatory requirement to accommodate 

students’ athletic interests and abilities.

June 29, 2010

(Section 504/Title II)

DCL concerning the obligation of colleges and universities to ensure 

that students with disabilities have equal access to emerging 

technologies in education.

October 26, 2010

(Title IX, Title VI, 

Section 504/Title II)

DCL concerning recipients’ obligations to protect students from 

student-on-student harassment on the basis of sex; race, color and 

national origin; and disability.

April 4, 2011

(Title IX)

DCL on Title IX requirements and how they relate to sexual 

harassment and sexual violence.

May 6, 2011

(Title VI)

DCL regarding schools’ enrollment procedures explaining that Title 

VI and the Equal Protection Clause forbid public schools to deny an 

education to children based on their citizenship or national origin.

May 26, 2011

(Section 504/Title II)

DCL and FAQ documents to K–12 and higher educational institution 

regarding the use of electronic book readers and other emerging 

technologies in compliance with civil rights laws that prohibit 

discrimination on the basis of disability.

December 2, 2011

(Title VI)

DCLs on the permissible voluntary uses of race to achieve diversity 

or avoid racial isolation in K-12 and Postsecondary institutions.

January 11, 2012

(Methods of 

Administration)

DCL on how state methods of administration programs can 

document the thoroughness of their compliance reviews.

January 19, 2012

(Section 504/Title II)

DCL and FAQ regarding how the Americans with Disabilities 

Amendments Act of 2008 affects students with disabilities attending 

public elementary and secondary schools and how OCR evaluates 

compliance with Title II of the ADA and Section 504 in light of the 

Amendments Act.
13

Helping

t

o

Ensure

Equal

Access

t

o

Educati

o

n

OCR’s policy guidance documents can have a widespread, positive impact on students’ 

civil rights by guiding recipients to proactively address critical civil rights issues without 

any enforcement action by OCR. For example, OCR’s 2011 release of comprehensive 

guidance on the obligations of schools and colleges under Title IX to prevent and 

respond to sexual harassment and violence has led to unilateral ongoing change in the 

higher education community. Within months of the release, dozens of universities 

revised their sexual assault policies. Furthermore, 

colleges across the country are sustaining 

intensive efforts to address these problems more 

comprehensively and effectively. For example, 

the 2012 National Conference on Law and Higher 

Education, attended by representatives of 

approximately 110 colleges from across the 

country, devoted a day-long session to 

investigating and preventing sexual misconduct, 

noting in its agenda, “Preventing college sexual 

misconduct is now a national higher education 

top priority. The U.S. Department of Education 

has issued new guidance and ramped up its 

enforcement and investigation efforts. 

Compliance is the order of the day.” The seminar 

featured an address by a senior staff member of OCR and presentations by 

administrators of colleges that had been investigated by OCR on this topic and by 

attorneys who specialize in training schools in best approaches to this issue.

In another example, OCR helped spur the national focus on bullying with its 

groundbreaking guidance in 2010 regarding bullying and its work with the 

Department to produce an analysis of state anti-bullying laws. Following the 

publication of these resources, a number of states enacted laws prohibiting bullying 

or harassment of students based on their sexual orientation, and states that had not 

previously addressed bullying enacted anti-bullying statutes. Moreover, these 

documents have provided a legal framework for much of the discussion and 

advocacy on bullying that has occurred in the last two years.

The Civil Rights Data Collection: 

A Transformed Tool to Engage Communities 

OCR recently released its transformed Civil Rights Data Collection (CRDC), which 

now offers the public an array of new civil rights indicators with which to gauge 

the “equity health” of schools. Thanks to the 100 percent response rate from the 

schools and districts surveyed across the country—representing 85 percent of 

America’s school children—the new CRDC has been heralded as a first-of-its-kind 

opportunity gap data tool that is allowing citizens and schools nationwide to identify 

educational equity-related problems and their solutions.5

5 The quality of the CRDC data ultimately depends on accurate collection and reporting by the participating districts. OCR 

strives to ensure CRDC data provide an accurate and comprehensive depiction of student access to educational opportunities in sampled school districts. The submission system includes a series of embedded edit checks to ensure data errors 

are corrected before the district submits its data. Additionally, each district, through its superintendent or the superintendent’s designee, is required to certify the accuracy of its submission.

“Perfect ....

It’s a very fair interpretation of what 

the court decided.”

—Lee Bollinger

President, Columbia University

(commenting on the use of race 

policy guidance)

 “U.S. Urges Creativity by Colleges 

to Gain Diversity” New York Times, 

December 2, 2011
14

Office

f

o

r

Civil

Rights

Expanding and Streamlining the Data Collection 

Beginning in the summer of 2009, OCR set about extensively redesigning the 

CRDC. It sought input from a wide range of experts within the Department and 

throughout the federal government, and from stakeholders from state and local 

education agencies and the broader education community, through meetings and 

two public notice-and-comment periods. Sources of advice included the Education 

Information Management Advisory Committee (a committee of the Council of Chief 

State School Officers), the National Center for Education Statistics Forum, state data 

coordinators for the Department’s EDFacts data submission system, and a sampling 

of school districts to ensure coordination among data collections and to minimize 

burden on schools and districts. OCR attorneys and staff from throughout the country 

were deeply involved to ensure the collection’s maximum utility in the investigatory 

process; this involvement was important given that, in the past, CRDC data were 

too often considered irrelevant by OCR’s attorneys and investigators. Now, the new 

CRDC data are used frequently by officials at OCR, the Department, schools and 

colleges, and members of the public alike. 

OCR’s processes ensured that, while several new indicators were added to the 

collection, indicators also were removed where appropriate. The effort was made 
15

Helping

t

o

Ensure

Equal

Access

t

o

Educati

o

n

easier because OCR, for the first time, 

made its data definitions and metrics 

consistent with other mandatory 

collections across the Department 

wherever possible. For example, rather 

than collecting data on teachers by raw 

number, it now reports on the number 

of “full-time equivalents,” as do EDFacts

and other data sets. Further, new finance 

data definitions were made identical to 

those legislatively mandated under the 

American Recovery and Reinvestment 

Act. The new collection also no longer 

requires schools to report to OCR data 

on students by disability type because 

those data are more easily imported from EDFacts. 

In order to deepen the understanding of students’ educational opportunities, the 

CRDC now includes data on whether students have access to the critical, rigorous 

courses needed for success in postsecondary education or training; previously 

collected data on promotion and graduation testing did not provide adequate 

information on the level of preparation students had for future success. It also 

collects new data on teacher experience and attendance; school finance; student 

retention; participation in SAT and ACT tests; discipline (including data on students 

with and without disabilities, data on in-school and out-of-school suspensions, 

referrals to law enforcement agencies, and school-related arrests); harassment and 

bullying; and restraint and seclusion. 

Moreover, the sample for the 2009–10 CRDC was expanded to include all schools in 

every district serving more than 3,000 students, a representative sample of schools 

by type (e.g., charter or magnet) and geography, and state juvenile justice agencies. 

To ensure an accurate cohort analysis, the collection is now done in two parts—the 

earlier one with enrollment indicators and the later one to track outcomes, such as 

completion of certain courses—and includes further disaggregation by disability 

status (by the Individuals with Disabilities in Education Act (IDEA) and Section 504 

separately), race (including further disaggregation of Asian/Pacific Islander and 

multiracial student population), and English learner status.

Making Data Transparent and Accessible 

In an effort to make the new CRDC easily usable by the public and OCR’s 

investigators and attorneys, OCR designed a new Web-based data collection tool 

that allows users to tailor the school-level indicators and produce visually intuitive 

graphic displays of school- and district-level tables, and made it available to the 

public in a privacy-protected format on OCR’s website, http://ocrdata.ed.gov. The 

new website is also research-friendly. For example, users have enhanced ability to 

search and query the database for types of schools as well as schools or districts 

meeting certain criteria. 

“The power of the Civil Rights Data 

Collection is not only in the numbers 

themselves, but in the impact it can have 

when married with the courage and the will 

to change. The undeniable truth is that the 

everyday educational experience for many 

students violates the principle of equity at 

the heart of the American promise. It is our 

collective duty to change that.”

—Secretary Arne Duncan

“The Transformed CRDC,” March 6, 2012
16

Office

f

o

r

Civil

Rights

Early analysis shows signs of increased visibility and usability. For example, the new 

CRDC website has clearly increased the public’s awareness of the data itself. Since 

the launch in March of 2012 through October, 2012, the CRDC site has seen more 

than 69,000 visits—an average of about 9,900 visits per month, compared to 2,600 

visits per month prior to the launch of the website and the release of these data. 

Helping to Understand and Use Data for Change 

To support the nearly 17,000 school districts reporting CRDC data, OCR frequently 

provides trainings and technical assistance on the new CRDC and its tools, including 

webinars and interactive data presentations. Additionally, OCR now offers technical 

assistance through a Partner Support Center where districts can call or email with 

questions. A full 78 percent of sampled districts (more than 5,000) contacted these 

support centers for the new collection. The Partner Support Center also provides 

targeted outreach to school districts to offer specific guidance and trainings to rural 

schools, charter schools, large districts, and districts that will be participating in the 
17

Helping

t

o

Ensure

Equal

Access

t

o

Educati

o

n

CRDC for the first time in 2011–12, which will be a universal collection across every 

school and district in the country. 

OCR continues to refine technical assistance to help districts meet their obligations 

to provide data that are accurate and sufficient for meaningful longitudinal analysis. 

For example, OCR has developed advanced Web-based survey features, increased 

the data edit checks and enhanced the post-certification review process so that 

each district can check its own data before they are released publicly. As they 

launch investigations, OCR’s staff across the country use the CRDC to prepopulate 

their data requests so that recipients do not have to make duplicate reports and 

submissions. This expedites investigations and reduces the reporting burdens. 

The CRDC’s utility reaches far beyond OCR to the entire Department, to other 

agencies and to researchers and policymakers across the nation. For example, the 

Department uses the CRDC in monitoring compliance with requirements for federal 

professional development funding; in monitoring, where appropriate, states under 

ESEA flexibility waivers; for defining a critical program requirement in the first-of-itskind Race to the Top district competition; and for evaluating the Office of English 

Language Acquisition’s (OELA) programs and activities. 

In addition, the collection has been identified by other agencies as a resource for 

informing policy and monitoring grant 

activities; and has been cited by more 

than 20 research reports in the last 

six months alone. Organizations 

such as advocacy groups, college 

professors, research institutes and 

news organizations already have done 

in-depth explorations of the local and 

regional CRDC data to determine 

where underlying problems exist 

and find models of successful school 

transformation. Further, at least two state boards of education, in Maryland and 

Michigan, and state legislatures in California and elsewhere have introduced policy 

supported by analyses of local CRDC data; and counties and districts in those states 

and others such as Colorado, Texas, Virginia, North Carolina and Delaware have 

recently taken up reform of zero-tolerance discipline policies, many citing CRDC 

data as parts of their movements.

What the Data Reveal—Student Opportunities Along Their Educational Pathways 

Data from the transformed CRDC have revealed profound inequities in public schools 

nationwide. These data, often being revealed for the first time ever, provide a new way 

to examine the journeys of students through the entire educational process—from prekindergarten through the end of high school. These data portray a disturbing picture 

for too many students across the nation. Though the data alone do not constitute a 

civil rights violation, they shine a spotlight on urgent educational concerns and have 

become an important tool for self-analysis in schools and districts across the country. 

“Transparency is the first step towards 

reform, and for districts that want to do the 

right thing, the CRDC is an incredible source 

of information that shows them where they 

can improve and how to get better.”

—Assistant Secretary Russlynn Ali

June 30, 2011
18

Office

f

o

r

Civil

Rights

Equally important, the CRDC data also reveal where schools and districts are making 

great progress and leading the nation in closing the opportunity gap. 

Across the spectrum, the new CRDC data tell an important story about a plethora of 

issues facing America’s schools and colleges. For example, on access to rigorous 

courses and learning environments, and indicators about teachers, the data describe 

common phenomena: 

► New data on early learning opportunities show that most districts offer their 

communities pre-kindergarten programs, about a fifth target those programs to 

low-income children, and half offer full-day pre-kindergarten. 

► New information about where opportunity gaps begin in elementary school 

reveals some concerning trends: 

■ White and Asian/Pacific Islander students are twice as likely to participate 

in gifted and talented education programs as their African-American 

and Hispanic peers. Conversely, African-American students, particularly 

African-American boys, are more likely to be labeled with disabilities than 

are their white and Asian counterparts.

■ Elementary schools serving the most Hispanic and African-American 

students pay, on average, $2,251 less per teacher every year than do 

schools in the same districts serving the fewest numbers of Hispanic and 

African-American students. 

► New data about middle school show the importance of a rigorous learning 

environment that prepares students for the challenges of high school: 

■ Students of different races succeed at about the same rates when they get 

access to rigorous math early (86 percent of white students taking Algebra 

I in middle school passed the course, as did 79 percent of Hispanic and 

African-American students); and students of all races or ethnicities who 

take algebra in these earlier grades pass the course at higher rates than 

those who take it later. But African-American and Hispanic students are 

less likely to get algebra early to begin with. 

■ Middle schools serving mostly African-American students are nearly twice 

as likely to have teachers with one or two years of experience as are 

middle schools within the same district that serve mostly white students. 

► And a host of never-before-available indicators inform us about high schools and 

college- and career-readiness:

■ Students with limited English proficiency make up 6 percent of the high 

school population (in grades 9–12), but are 15 percent of the students for 

whom algebra is the highest-level math course taken by the final year of 

their high school career. 

■ While over 80 percent of the high schools in the CRDC offer their students 

Algebra I, geometry and biology, only 62 percent offer physics and onehalf offer calculus. And in diverse districts, of the high schools serving 

the most Hispanic and African-American students, less than a third offer 

calculus, and only 40 percent offer physics. 
19

Helping

t

o

Ensure

Equal

Access

t

o

Educati

o

n

■ Hispanic students make up 20 percent of the student body at high schools 

offering calculus, but only 10 percent of the students taking calculus. 

► Girls are equitably represented in most rigorous high school math courses, 

including Geometry, Algebra II, and Calculus. In AP mathematics (Calculus and 

Statistics), however, girls are only 48 percent of the enrollment, and boys have 

consistently outnumbered girls in these courses. And, overall, boys take AP 

tests and pass AP tests at a higher rate than girls. In fact, 60 percent of 

boys passed an AP exam compared to 55 percent of girls.

■ Only 2 percent of the students with disabilities are taking at least one 

AP class.

► The transformed CRDC makes public long-hidden data about other important 

indicators of school culture, including: numbers of students, broken down by 

demographic characteristics, who are suspended once and multiple times, 

expelled, and arrested in school; and new information about the use of restraint 

and seclusion in our classrooms:

■ African-American students are over 31⁄2 times more likely to be suspended 

or expelled compared to their white peers. 

■ One in five African-American boys receives at least one out-of-school 

suspension, more than any other group of students. And, while girls generally 

receive fewer punishments than boys, African-American girls are suspended 

at a rate higher than Asian/Pacific Islander, Hispanic or white boys. (See 

Exhibit 8.)

20%

18%

16%

14%

12%

10%

8%

6%

4%

2%

0%

American Indian

Asian/Pacific Islander

Black

Hispanic

White

6%

1%

11%

4%

3%

12%

3%

20%

9%

7%

Exhibit 8: Out-of-School Suspension Rates by Race and Sex, 2009–10 

Sample size: 7,000 school districts, including over 72,000 schools.

Source: CRDC data.

Female Male
20

Office

f

o

r

Civil

Rights

■ Students with disabilities who are covered under the IDEA are more than 

twice as likely to be suspended out-of-school than are students who do 

not receive services under the IDEA. 

■ Nearly 30,000 students were expelled under zero-tolerance policies in the 

CRDC sample. And in districts that reported expulsions under zero-tolerance 

policies, Hispanic and African-American students represent 45 percent of the 

student body but 56 percent of the students expelled under such policies.

■ Never-before-seen data on restraint and seclusion show that while Hispanic 

students represent 24 percent of students without disabilities, they are a full 

42 percent of students without disabilities who are subject to seclusion.

► First-of-its-kind data about bullying and harassment: 

■ Across the grades, data show that districts are confronting issues of 

bullying and harassment throughout the country—nearly every district in 

the sample reports having a policy on bullying and harassment. Over onehalf report at least one incident of bullying and harassment on the basis of 

a student’s sex, nearly half report incidents of racial or ethnic harassment; 

and almost one-third report at least one incident of bullying or harassment 

on the basis of a student’s disability. 

■ All told, over 91,600 students were disciplined for bullying or harassment 

on the basis of sex. Nearly 80 percent were male.

What the Data Reveal—Success Stories 

The CRDC data on opportunities for America’s school children show that access 

and opportunity gaps can be closed. Analyses using new tools on the CRDC allow 

educators, researchers, policymakers, parents and students to find districts and 

schools where, for example, disciplinary policies are fair, and all students have equal 

opportunity to participate in gifted and talented programs, to take algebra early, and to 

get access to the full range of college- and career-ready courses in high school that 

they will need to succeed in life after graduation. With these tools the public can find 

and learn from schools and districts defying myths about achievement and opportunity. 

For example, the CRDC can shine a spotlight on:

► An elementary school in Dade County, Florida, has 600 students, 96 percent of 

them African-American and Hispanic and 90 percent growing up in poverty. Yet, 

over twice as many Hispanic students participate in talented and gifted programs 

than in the district as a whole. 

► A school district in Elizabeth, New Jersey, where 89 percent of students are 

African-American and Hispanic, and all the district’s students are taking Algebra I 

by the end of 8th grade with a 95 percent pass rate. 

► At a high school in Montgomery County Public Schools in Maryland, where 68 

percent of students are African-American and Hispanic, 72 percent of those 

students are enrolled in physics; in contrast, across the CRDC only 40 percent 

of African-American students are enrolled in physics, as are 45 percent in 

Montgomery County as a whole. 
21

Helping

t

o

Ensure

Equal

Access

t

o

Educati

o

n

Improved Operations to Meet OCR’s Goals

Increased Productivity

Against a backdrop of OCR’s substantially increased investigation docket, technical 

assistance activities, and policy and data work, combined with limited resources—

for example, since 1982 OCR’s staff has nearly halved while its case load has 

increased almost fourfold (see Exhibit 9)—over the last four years OCR developed 

and implemented a new vision for empowering staff and using technology innovation 

to enhance efficiency, effectiveness and consistency in operations. OCR teams 

across the country rose to meet new challenges, performing tasks with aplomb and 

efficiency–receiving and resolving thousands more cases in 2012 than they did in 

2008, and doing so faster. (See Exhibit 10.)6

Building Capacity, Support and Accountability 

In both practice and procedure, OCR’s laser-like focus on excellent and efficient 

civil rights enforcement has meant ensuring its expert staff in its 12 regional offices 

6 Because of an increased appropriation, in FY 2010, OCR hired a total of 95 staff; 71 new mission critical staff in the field 

and 11 new mission critical staff in headquarters, as well as backfilled 13 mission critical management positions nationwide. 

However, due to attrition in FY 2010, the net gain to staff size was only 47.

0

976

1,840

848

4,432

698

5,019

582

7,833

FY 1982 FY 1992 FY 2002 FY 2012

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

7,000

8,000

9,000

FTE Usage

Complaints Received

Exhibit 9: Growing Case Load of Complaints Received Across 

a 40-Year Spectrum, FY 1982–2012

Exhibit 10: OCR Case Load and Timely Resolutions, FY 2008-2012

Number of Complaints 

With Resolution Due Dates 

Within the Fiscal Year 

Number of Complaints 

Resolved Within 180 Days 

of Receipt 

Percentage of Complaints 

Resolved Within 180 Days 

Fiscal Year of Receipt 

2012 8,051 7,491 93% 

2011 7,159 6,580 92% 

2010 6,671 6,025 90% 

2009 6,167 5,684 92% 

2008 5,964 5,412 91% 
22

Office

f

o

r

Civil

Rights

are supported, respected and accountable, and that the work in each region is 

coordinated to ensure shared learning, consistent practices and collaborative and 

aligned enforcement. For example, as opposed to the restrictive and siloed nature 

of past practice, since 2009, career managers and leaders have been empowered 

to make staffing decisions and to design and implement technical assistance and 

outreach initiatives with leadership, support and coordination from headquarters. 

OCR has met its twin goals of strong and increasing staff accountability and 

empowerment. It developed new institutional procedures and practices to ensure 

staff engage with each other, share best practices and receive ongoing and tailored 

professional development from their expert colleagues across the agency. 

Using Technology to Gain Efficiency 

Beginning in 2009, with innovation and design expertise from our in-house staff, 

OCR revamped its nationwide case management system, allowing for ongoing realtime analyses of OCR’s docket, including emerging trends in schools and districts 

across the country, and better management and resource allocation decisions. 

OCR also developed new and efficient ways of helping students and institutions 

faster. Changes in practice and procedure include the re-engineering of the online 

complaint assessment platform to allow members of the public to better direct 

complaints and concerns to the appropriate forum, and to improve the quality of 

information OCR obtains at the outset of the investigatory process. Because many 

complaints are filed electronically as opposed to in person—in FY 2012, for example, 

about 70 percent of complaints (about 5,530) were submitted electronically—more 

accurate and useful online forms at the start will expedite investigations and the 

steps toward resolution. Staff leads from across OCR’s regions are working with 

experts on Web-based interactive sites and privacy protections, and the new 

complaint forms are set to go live early next year. 

Ensuring Prompt Action and Consistent Results Countrywide 

Recently, OCR also piloted a new staff-led procedure to rapidly respond to certain 

types of cases. For example, OCR’s analyses of complaint intake data show 

that disability complaints consistently represent about half of OCR’s complaint 

workload—and thousands of these cases are relatively routine single-issue and 

individual complaints. To expedite resolution of this large group of complaints and 

ensure students are provided the supports they need in a prompt manner, OCR 

has recently launched a Rapid Resolution Processing Protocol in four of its twelve 

regions. Preliminary findings from this pilot resolution option are impressive: on 

average, using the protocol has reduced resolution time to 33 days against a 

historic average of 159 days for the typical case of this nature, while still maintaining 

high-quality service for the parties. It allows OCR staff to provide more immediate 

feedback on civil rights concerns to educational institutions and more timely results 

and better customer service for complainants so they can more quickly move 

forward with their education. The pilot has been applauded by OCR teammates, 

allowing them to be more productive while freeing up time for more complex cases. 
23

Helping

t

o

Ensure

Equal

Access

t

o

Educati

o

n

Maximizing Impact: Supporting Equity and Reform

As the Department of Education’s central office responsible for advancing equity 

through civil rights law enforcement, over the last four years OCR has worked 

tirelessly to support staff and leadership across the Department and administration 

and has collaborated on a variety of issues. For example, over the last year, OCR 

worked to help develop enforcement reporting requirements under IDEA; policy 

proposals for programs authorized by the Carl D. Perkins Vocational and Applied 

Technology Education Act; equity safeguards in ESEA flexibility; accountability 

provisions in Department-supported teacher preparation programs; equity-related 

outcomes in the administration of formula and competitive grants; and guidance 

on equity provisions in ESEA-required district and state report cards. In another 

example, OCR collaborated to help foster a positive learning culture by helping to 

issue memoranda on state anti-bullying laws, the Equal Access Act, and restraint 

and seclusion. Some signs of success in these efforts are clear. For example, the 

Department’s previous strategic plan, released in 2007, failed to mention OCR or 

its work. Now, the Department’s strategic plan through 2014 includes clear equityrelated goals for students, and OCR is referenced several times as a critical office 

working to advance these goals. 

OCR also works with a number of interagency initiatives, including the secretary 

of education’s and attorney general’s Supportive School Discipline Initiative; the 

Violence Against Women Act Interagency Policy Workgroup that seeks to combat 

and prevent sexual violence; the White House Council on Women and Girls; the 

Advisory Commission on Accessible Instructional Materials in Postsecondary 

Education for Students with Disabilities; interagency collaborations to help 

coordinate Title IX enforcement efforts pertaining to access to science, technology, 

engineering and math (STEM) programs; and the White House Initiatives on 

Hispanic, African-American, American Indian and Alaska Native, and AsianAmerican and Pacific Islander young people, and on Historically Black Colleges 

and Universities. In addition, it has been a lead office in helping design and lead 

the implementation of the Department’s plan for improving access to services by 

persons with limited English proficiency pursuant to Executive Order 13166, and 

in helping to ensure the accessibility of the Department’s communications and 

website pursuant to Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973. OCR is a part 

of the secretary’s and Department’s senior-most advisory and decision-making 

committees. And OCR houses the Secretary’s Equity and Excellence Commission, 

established by Congress in the 2010 Consolidated Appropriations Act, comprising 

a group of 26 national education experts assembled to make recommendations 

to the secretary on ways to improve educational equity and excellence and close 

achievement and opportunity gaps still hobbling far too many of America’s school 

children. In this role, OCR provides financial, administrative, staff and operating 

support for the Commission and its members, and OCR’s assistant secretary sits as 

an ex officio member of the Commission. Lastly, OCR has worked in partnership 

with the State Department to implement the U.S.-Brazil Joint Action Plan to Eliminate 

Racial and Ethnic Discrimination and Promote Equality (JAPER) and with UNESCO 

to address sex discrimination suffered by LGBT students in member states. 
24

Office

f

o

r

Civil

Rights
25

Helping

t

o

Ensure

Equal

Access

t

o

Educati

o

n

G

The majority of OCR’s efforts are targeted at discrimination on the basis of 

race, color and national origin, prohibited by Title VI; discrimination based 

on a complainant’s sex, prohibited by Title IX; and discrimination based on a 

complainant’s disability, prohibited by Title II and Section 504. The three sections 

below provide examples of the types of complaints and compliance reviews OCR 

resolved, the policy guidance issued, and our technical assistance delivered during 

FYs 2009–12 in each of these three areas. The final section describes our work on 

harassment and bullying, one of the important issues that involves all three areas. 

Together, these examples illustrate how the strategic alignment of our enforcement 

activities with our overall goals can result in positive change for students, parents, 

and teachers and ultimately contributes to the success of our nation’s education 

system.

Title VI: Discrimination on the Basis of Race, Color, and 

National Origin

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

color or national origin in programs and activities operated by recipients of federal 

funds. It states, “No person in the United States shall, on the basis of race, color, 

or national origin, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be 

subjected to discrimination under any program or activity receiving Federal financial 

assistance.” In the education arena, Title VI’s protection applies to all elementary 

and secondary schools, colleges and universities—public or private—that receive 

federal financial assistance, and to certain other institutions. Its protection extends 

to all aspects of these institutions’ programs and activities.

Policy 

OCR has also issued three policy guidance 

documents that address topics related to 

Title VI: (1) how schools and colleges may 

voluntarily consider the race of students to 

pursue diversity, including racial diversity, 

in their student bodies and, in the case 

of K–12 schools, to avoid racial isolation; 

(2) the equal right of every child in the 

United States to a public elementary and 

secondary education regardless of his or 

her citizenship or immigration status or the 

status of his or her parents or guardians; 

and (3) schools’ obligations to respond to 

bullying and harassment based on race, 

color, or national origin.

“The administration is making strong 

policy statements on low-income 

children and students of color, 

outlining remedies.” 

—Bob Wise

Former Governor of West Virginia

“U.S. Urges Creativity by Colleges 

to Gain Diversity”

New York Times, December 2, 2011
26

Office

f

o

r

Civil

Rights

Enforcement 

In the last four fiscal years, OCR received over 7,700 Title VI–related complaints 

(see Exhibit 11)—more than ever before in a four-year period—and launched 61 

systemic, proactive investigations that, collectively, address a broad range of Title 

VI–related issues in institutions across the nation. As described more fully below, 

OCR has worked on Title VI allegations such as the denial of access to collegeand career-preparatory courses and programs and other educational opportunities, 

discriminatory discipline, and barriers to education for English learners.

Technical Assistance 

Educators, as well as parents and students, must have the knowledge and skills to 

identify discrimination, to prevent it, and to address it or get help when it does occur. 

Every year, OCR provides technical assistance to schools and communities around 

the country on both longstanding and emerging civil rights issues. In FY 2012 

alone, OCR engaged in 106 technical assistance events on Title VI–related issues.

Admissions 370

Assignment of Students 155

Desegregation 14

Different Treatment/Exclusion/Denial of Benefits 1,602

Discipline 1,253

Employment 737

English Language Learners 286

Extracurricular Activities 142

Financial Assistance/Retention 276

Graduation Requirements 146

Minorities in Special ED 27

Racial Harassment 1,689

Recruitment 8

Resource Equity & Comparability 216

Retaliation 1,705

STEM/CCR 58

Other 596

Exhibit 11: Number of Title VI Issues Raised in OCR Complaints, 

Broken Down by Issue, FY 2009–12

Total Number of Complaints Raising Title VI Issues, FY 2009–12 = 7,722.

Note: A single complaint can raise multiple issues; therefore the total 

number of issues raised will exceed the number of complaints received.

STEM refers to Science, Technology, Engineering and Math.

CCR refers to College and Career Readiness.
27

Helping

t

o

Ensure

Equal

Access

t

o

Educati

o

n

Issue: Equal Access to Comparable Educational Opportunities 

(Including College- and Career-Preparatory Programs) 

While all students may not choose to go to college, OCR works to ensure that 

schools and school districts give students of every race, color and national origin an 

equal opportunity to pursue that choice. 

Enforcement—College- and CareerReadiness and Success 

OCR’s efforts to ensure equal access to 

meaningful educational opportunities led to 

15 Title VI–related, proactive systemwide 

investigations around the country over 

the last four years. These investigations 

involved student access to resources, 

curricula and opportunities that foster college- and career-readiness. In addition, 

OCR received nearly 60 complaints in this area during the same period.

In several cases, school districts were providing students in predominantly AfricanAmerican middle and high schools with fewer or inferior resources and opportunities 

than students in predominantly white middle and high schools. As part of its 

investigations into whether these resource differentials were discriminatory, OCR has 

found inequities that include the following:

► A number of cases have revealed, among other inequities, racial disparities in the 

availability of and enrollment in Advanced Placement (AP), college credit, gifted 

and talented and other higher-level courses, as well as appropriate counseling on 

taking such courses. In one district, African-American students were encouraged 

to enroll in an ethnic literature course rather than an AP course based on the 

belief that the students would “connect better” and “be more comfortable” in 

the ethnic literature class. In another, students from a predominantly AfricanAmerican high school had to find their own transportation to travel to AP classes 

off-site, or take such classes online, while students at the predominantly white 

high school could take AP classes on-site.

► Issues raised in other cases include access to instructional equipment and 

interactive technology such as smart boards and well-functioning computers 

in labs, classrooms and libraries—along with staff dedicated to computer and 

technology support. One predominantly African-American high school failed 

to fully deliver a single AP science course with a lab due to the absence of 

necessary lab equipment.

► Among the issues raised in other cases is access to better and more up-todate library collections and textbooks. In one recent investigation, the average 

publication date of the U.S. history books in the libraries of the predominantly 

African-American schools was 1986.

In such cases, OCR seeks to ensure that school districts take steps to eliminate 

inequities by, for example:

► Expanding access to technology and library materials. 

“By 2020, this nation will once again 

have the highest proportion of 

college graduates in the world.” 

President Barack Obama, 

July 14, 2009
28

Office

f

o

r

Civil

Rights

► Ensuring fair access to gifted and talented programs. 

► Addressing gaps in language proficiency.

► Improving staff attendance.

► Providing staff professional development in academic subjects and cultural 

competency.

► Providing “wraparound” social services. 

OCR’s resolution agreements also focus on strengthening the “pipeline” of rigorous 

academic preparation that allows students to graduate from high school ready for 

college or careers, through measures such as the following:

► A review of course enrollment policies and recordkeeping practices to ensure 

equal access, quicker identification of disparities, and transparency to the public.

► Improved strategies to encourage middle and high school students to participate 

in pre-AP, AP and other higher-level courses.

► Steps to ensure that the availability of higher-level curricula, including AP 

courses, is comparable throughout the district, irrespective of the racial or ethnic 

makeup of any particular school.

► Greater availability of rigorous, effective, higher-level online courses.

► Broader parental outreach concerning the benefits of honors, AP, and dualenrollment courses.

Issue: Combating Discriminatory Discipline

In many educational institutions, minority students are disciplined more harshly 

and more frequently than other students, resulting in serious, negative educational 

consequences, particularly when such students are excluded from school. 

As examples of these discipline disparities, African-American students represent 

18 percent of students in the 2009–10 CRDC sample but 35 percent of students 

suspended once, 46 percent of those suspended more than once, 39 percent of 

students expelled, and 36 percent of the students arrested on public-school grounds. 

Hispanic students are one-and-a-half times more likely to be expelled than their 

white counterparts. Additionally, in districts that showed at least one expulsion under 

zero-tolerance policies, African-Americans represent 19 percent of enrollment but 33 

percent of the students expelled.7

 (See Exhibit 12.) 

While discipline decisions are inherently local decisions about classroom 

management and school culture, a district’s discipline policies, procedures and 

practices must comply with the requirements of Title VI. As in all cases, data alone 

do not constitute a violation of the civil rights laws, but large disparities in the rate of 

disciplinary sanctions imposed on students of different races give rise to concerns 

about the school environment and, in some cases, possible discrimination.

7 2009–10 CRDC data.
29

Helping

t

o

Ensure

Equal

Access

t

o

Educati

o

n

Enforcement—Discipline 

OCR has intensified its enforcement activities to ensure that students are not 

disciplined more severely or frequently because of their race, color or national origin. 

In fiscal years 2009 through 2012, OCR launched 20 proactive investigations in 

schools with significant racial disparities in discipline based on data from the most 

recent CRDC. Additionally, during the last four years, OCR received more than 

1,250 complaints brought by parents, students or other concerned individuals about 

possible civil rights violations involving school discipline systems. OCR also held 

two major conferences with the DOJ on issues relating to student discipline. 

Disparate discipline investigations have revealed incidents of harsher treatment of 

African-American students and other minority students than white students who 

commit similar infractions and who have similar discipline histories. These cases 

reveal school climates in which the expectations and consequences regarding typical 

juvenile behavior and misbehavior are significantly more severe for African-American 

and other minority children.

► In one high school, for example, two students with similar discipline histories 

were found to have engaged in “Unauthorized Use of Electronic Devices.” A 

white student was assigned detention for using headphones after having been 

told repeatedly to put them away. An African-American student, however, was 

assigned a one-day suspension for using a cell phone and iPod.

► In a middle school, two students, also with similar disciplinary histories, were 

punished for inappropriate language. A white student who said, “Shut the **** 

up,” was assigned lunch detention. An African-American student, on the other 

hand, who said, “Suck my  ,” was suspended for one day.

► Two students engaged in a pushing incident with each other at school, and a 

security officer took them to the office. Although the students had similar 

Exhibit 12: Disparities in Discipline by Race and Ethnicity, 2009–10

18%

24%

1% 6% 1% 3% 1% 1% 1% 2% 1% 3%

51%

35%

25%

36%

46%

22%

29%

39%

24%

33%

36%

24%

36%

Overall (sample)

Sample size: 7,000 school districts, including over 72,000 schools.

Source: CRDC data.

Out-of-School

Suspensions 

(single)

Out-of-School

Suspensions 

(multiple)

Expulsions School-Related

Arrests

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

American Indian

Asian/Pacific Islander

Black

Hispanic

White
30

Office

f

o

r

Civil

Rights

disciplinary histories, the white student received three days in-school suspension, 

while the Native American student was arrested by the police and received a 

10-day out-of-school suspension.

► In another case, school administrators used their discretionary authority to 

impose harsher punishments than the student code normally called for on 

African-American students as 

compared with similarly situated 

white students, with a frequency 

that statistical analysis showed 

was virtually impossible to have 

occurred by chance. In one 

instance, an African-American 

kindergartner was given a fiveday suspension for setting off a 

fire alarm, while a white ninthgrader in the same district was 

suspended for one day for the 

same offense.

In resolving disparate discipline 

investigations, OCR works with 

school districts to design robust 

remedies appropriate to the facts and circumstances of each case. School districts 

and their stakeholders are critical partners in this effort, for they have the expertise to 

develop strategies that can lead to real institutional change. The goal is to ensure that 

all students are provided schools that are safe and conducive to learning. In order to 

eradicate root causes of inequities, OCR and school districts have crafted resolutions 

requiring the district to undertake steps such as the following:

► Working with an expert reviewing and modifying disciplinary policies to ensure that 

rules are clearly defined and easily understood by students, staff and parents and 

that school authorities consider alternatives to expulsion and suspension to keep 

students in the classroom.

► Developing and implementing strategies for teaching positive student behavior.

► Ensuring that school staff have appropriate resources and training in order to 

effectively manage classrooms and school campuses.

► Providing supports for struggling students, including access to mentors, 

counselors, behavior interventionists or student advocates.

► Implementing school climate surveys for students, parents, and school staff to 

measure their perceptions of school safety and fairness in discipline, as well as 

their understanding of disciplinary rules and behavioral expectations.

► Creating the position of a discipline coordinator who is responsible for ensuring 

that the implementation of the district’s policies is fair and equitable and for 

addressing complaints from parents, guardians, students and others regarding 

the implementation of the district’s disciplinary policies.

“[Superintendent Smith] said he believes the 

measures the district will take, which build on 

steps taken over the last few years, will shift the 

culture in the district—and have the potential to 

improve a troubled city with a history of poverty and 

violence. ‘We think as a public school system we 

can contribute to a healthier city by addressing this 

problem,’ Smith said.”

—Anthony Smith, 

Superintendent Oakland School District, 

referring to Oakland Unified’s resolution with OCR to 

address Title VI and discipline. 

Education Week, September 28, 2012 
31

Helping

t

o

Ensure

Equal

Access

t

o

Educati

o

n

► Collecting and evaluating data regarding all referrals for student discipline, 

including those that did not result in the imposition of disciplinary sanctions and 

referrals to law enforcement, at all district schools.

■ Such a recordkeeping system could include demographic information on 

all students involved (race, sex, disability and English-learner status), as 

well as numerous other indicators such as a description of the misconduct, 

previous attempts to address the behavior, witnesses to the incident, and 

discipline imposed.

► Providing regular informational programs to families and students to explain 

behavior expectations, present discipline data, advise them of the availability of a 

discipline coordinator, and invite discussion of how the process is working.

Issue: Ensuring Equal Opportunities for English Learners 

Children whose first language is not English (English learners or EL students) require 

language supports in order to meaningfully participate in school. Title VI requires 

that elementary and secondary schools take affirmative steps to ensure that English 

learners can overcome language barriers and effectively participate in their schools’ 

educational programs. A school district must implement a sound educational approach 

in its programs for EL students and show 

that it is teaching EL students English 

and providing them with access to the 

district’s curriculum. Title VI also requires 

schools to adequately communicate with 

limited English proficient parents about 

important school-related information in 

languages they can understand. 

Enforcement—English Learners 

OCR has sought to dramatically improve 

language assistance services and 

programs for EL students in communities 

across the country, so that limited 

English proficiency is not an obstacle 

for these students to fully access the 

school’s educational opportunities. Over 

the past four years, OCR has launched 

21 proactive, systemic investigations 

relating to EL programs and services 

and has received nearly 300 complaints 

alleging discrimination against EL 

students.

OCR cases show that EL students 

and families are sometimes denied the 

language services they need to fully 

“¡Por favor, necesito su ayuda!” (“Please, 

I need your help!”) A Spanish-speaking 

mother of a non-verbal autistic child from a 

small district in South Carolina approached 

the OCR staff person who had just 

presented to a sizable group of parents and 

community members, pleading for help in 

understanding her son’s IEP. 

Because many parents in areas with large 

concentrations of minority, low-income, 

and limited English proficient families 

are unaware of their rights, several OCR 

offices expanded their outreach to these 

communities. 

OCR reached out to numerous 

organizations in several states across the 

Mid-Atlantic and Southern regions that work 

closely with African-American, Hispanic and 

LEP, and other underserved communities 

to educate their members and the public 

about OCR’s complaint process and the civil 

rights laws we OCR enforces. Many of the 

sessions were conducted in both English 

and Spanish and were delivered to parent 

and student audiences. 
32

Office

f

o

r

Civil

Rights

access school opportunities. Examples of the problems OCR has addressed include 

the following:

► School districts, and in one case an entire state, improperly excluded students 

from English language acquisition services because surveys or testing 

instruments did not consider critical factors such as the language students speak 

at home or a student’s distinct needs in writing, reading, speaking, and listening. 

► A school district failed, for more than five years, to identify EL students and led 

parents to believe that they had to “opt out” of EL services for their children if they 

wanted them to enroll in particular schools or programs.

► A school district failed to implement an effective process for identifying and 

meeting the language assistance needs of its limited English proficient parents 

to ensure they received important information about their children’s education—

despite the fact that nearly 60 percent of the district’s 11,000 students identified 

their home language as Arabic.

► Charter schools and charter management organizations showed low enrollment 

of EL students (as well as students with disabilities).

■ Proactive reviews of such schools are addressing a number of issues, 

including whether they have nondiscriminatory recruitment and admission 

policies and practices with regard to EL students (and students with 

disabilities), whether they provide equal educational opportunities to such 

students, and whether they adequately communicate with limited English 

proficient parents.

OCR obtains robust, systemic resolutions to help ensure that schools are meeting 

their Title VI obligations with respect to EL students that include measures such as 

the following:

► Testing English proficiency in each of the four language domains of speaking, 

listening, reading and writing.

► Providing EL students––in some cases, thousands in a single district––with 

language assistance services to enable them to access their core content 

classes, such as math, social studies and science.

► Delivering English language development instruction to EL students.

► Offering compensatory services to students who were improperly denied services 

and have not made adequate progress as a result.

► Helping students exit from language assistance programs, when appropriate.

► Evaluating the success of districts’ EL programs in teaching students English and 

enabling them to perform academically at grade level.

► Implementing the means to communicate with limited English proficient parents 

so that they can make informed decisions regarding their children’s education.

► Clarifying that federal law did not permit a state to discriminatorily remove teachers 

who were not native English speakers under the state’s claim that the teachers’ 
33

Helping

t

o

Ensure

Equal

Access

t

o

Educati

o

n

English was heavily accented. As a result, the state now focuses its monitoring on 

whether a teacher has been certified by the local district as fluent in English.

► For charter schools or special programs that have discriminatorily denied EL

students access, revising admission and recruitment policies and practices 

to ensure that EL students are not denied admission based on their national 

origin, tailoring recruitment and outreach to EL students and their parents, and 

ensuring that EL students can access core curriculum and appropriate language 

assistance and instruction. 

Technical Assistance 

OCR has also provided hundreds of technical assistance presentations over the last 

three years to parents, educators, administrators and community members that have 

included information on the obligations schools have under Title VI to provide EL 

students with support and opportunities and to communicate effectively with parents 

whose primary language is not English. This outreach has included numerous 

technical assistance activities with state-level officials. (See text box on page 29.)

Issue: Equal Rights of All Children to Attend Public School 

Regardless of Immigration or Citizenship Status

Policy—Equal Right to Attend School 

OCR, along with the Department’s Office of the General Counsel, issued policy 

guidance with the DOJ affirming the equal right of every child in the United States to 

a public elementary and secondary education regardless of his or her citizenship or 

immigration status or the status of his or her parents or guardians. As the guidance 

explains, this right was established in a landmark 1982 case called Plyler v. Doe, 

in which the Supreme Court stated that denying “innocent children” access to a 

public education “imposes a lifetime of hardship on a discrete class of children not 

accountable for their disabling status.”8

The guidance makes clear that schools’ enrollment policies and practices must 

be consistent with Title VI’s prohibition against discrimination based on race, color 

or national origin. It also provides examples of permissible and impermissible 

enrollment practices to help districts and states meet this responsibility as well as 

examples of the types of information that may not be used as a basis for denying a 

child enrollment in a public elementary or secondary school. For example, school 

districts that require children to establish age during the enrollment process should 

accept as proof a variety of different documents, including foreign birth certificates. 

The guidance notes that school districts that have proof-of-residency requirements 

might include utility bills or rental receipts among the accepted documents, but 

should not include requests for immigration papers, because such documents are 

not necessary to establish residency in the district. Moreover, any proof of age or 

residency requirements must be uniformly applied to all students.

8 Plyler v. Doe, 457 U.S. 202, 223 (1982).
34

Office

f

o

r

Civil

Rights

Enforcement—Equal Right to Attend School

OCR has addressed allegations of districts discriminating on the basis of race, color 

and national origin in the way they improperly focused on the immigration status of 

parents and students. 

► In one case, OCR hosted a town hall meeting for the parents of English learners 

residing in a district. During the meeting, which was also attended by a school 

district representative, OCR 

informed parents of their 

rights under Title VI and of 

the district’s responsibilities 

to provide services to 

students who are English 

learners. A Dominican 

mother with limited English 

proficiency explained to 

OCR that she was required 

to provide immigration 

papers while registering 

her child for school, even 

though they were irrelevant 

to the district’s informational 

needs. The forms she was 

given were also in English, 

which she could not read, 

raising a question as to 

whether the district was 

meeting its obligation to 

provide meaningful access 

to limited English proficient 

parents. The parent filed 

a complaint immediately 

after the meeting with OCR. 

As a result of the town hall 

meeting, the district official committed to making sure that registration forms were 

available in Spanish. OCR is investigating the other issues the parent raised.

► In another case, a school district allegedly asked Hispanic parents for proof of 

residency, Social Security cards, and driver’s licenses when they came to enroll 

their children, despite the fact that the district had a policy allowing 30 days to 

prove residency. The district agreed with OCR to change its procedures to clarify 

that all students had 30 days to prove residency. It also agreed to translate 

residency documents into Spanish, and to accept an expanded list of documents, 

including an affidavit, to serve as proof of residency.

► In a third case, the complainant alleged that a school district discriminated 

against Hispanic students in the enrollment process, including by asking a 

Hispanic student who presented proof of residency to also provide a passport 

and immigrant visa prior to enrolling in a high school. School staff allegedly 

“This is not supposed to happen in the United States 

of America,” said a very upset mother of two young 

children during a 2010 community meeting held by 

OCR in a Northeastern district. 

At the meeting, the mother, who is limited in English 

proficiency, told OCR about the informal barriers 

she experienced as she tried to register her two 

young children for public school. After being refused 

available Spanish language services, she tried to 

explain why she did not yet have proof of residency. 

The staff person became increasingly rude and 

said she had to have the forms filled out within 30 

days, or be charged tuition for the entire year as a 

nonresident. Two other parents at the meeting raised 

similar concerns about registration and enrollment, 

which at the time required four forms for showing 

proof of residency. 

OCR shared information with the parents about and 

the protections afforded by Title VI under the U.S. 

Constitution, and by the Supreme Court holding in 

Plyler v Doe, against this type of harassment and 

discrimination. After the meeting, the parents decided 

to file complaints with OCR and OCR staff assisted 

with the filing process. 
35

Helping

t

o

Ensure

Equal

Access

t

o

Educati

o

n

made comments to the student, such as, “How can you be here without a 

passport or visa?” and “You must be an illegal.” The case was resolved with a 

district commitment to review and, if necessary, revise its registration documents 

to make clear that immigration documents and passports are not required 

for enrollment and to provide annual training for staff on proper enrollment 

procedures using OCR’s guidance documents on this issue.

Issue: Supporting Schools, Districts and Colleges That Voluntarily 

Pursue Racial Diversity

Many educators believe—and the Supreme Court has affirmed—that schools and 

colleges have compelling interests in pursuing diverse student bodies. The benefits 

of diverse learning environments are many—for example, they help students 

sharpen their critical thinking and analytical skills; they prepare students to succeed 

in an increasingly diverse and interconnected world; they break down stereotypes 

and reduce bias; and they enable schools to fulfill their role in opening doors for 

students of all backgrounds. Yet many of America’s schools remain racially isolated; 

indeed, research has shown that America’s schools have been growing more 

segregated since the 1980s.9

Policy—Voluntary Pursuit of Racial Diversity 

To increase clarity on this important issue, OCR withdrew previously issued 

guidance that did not fully explain the legal options available to schools and colleges 

that choose to pursue diversity, and in December 2011 issued new guidance jointly 

with DOJ’s Civil Rights Division. The two-part guidance—one for K–12 schools 

and one for postsecondary institutions—explains the Supreme Court decisions 

that provide the legal framework for the 

consideration of race and national origin by 

educational institutions in pursuit of diversity 

and avoiding racial isolation. 

As a starting point, the guidance recognizes 

that schools and colleges have a compelling 

interest in increasing diversity. Institutions do 

not have to wear blinders—they can look at 

whether their decisions will deprive students of 

the opportunity to learn and interact with students of other races and national origins, 

and they can affirmatively make decisions to increase diversity. The guidance goes 

on to offer concrete examples of how the Supreme Court’s legal framework applies 

to specific techniques for achieving diversity. 

The K–12 guidance indicates how school districts can pursue diversity and reduce 

racial isolation through their decisions on locating schools, including magnet schools, 

and specialized academic, athletic or extracurricular programs; closing schools or 

9 NCES Table: Public elementary and secondary school students, by racial/ethnic enrollment concentration of school: Fall 

1995, fall 2000, and fall 2009, available at http://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d11/tables/dt11_102.asp. Gary Orfield, Reviving the Goal of an Integrated Society: A 21st Century Challenge, 12-13 (The Civil Rights Project).

“Obama stands up for racial 

diversity in education policy.”

—Mary Sanchez, 

Chicago Tribune, 

December 8, 2011
36

Office

f

o

r

Civil

Rights

programs; aligning grade and feeder patterns; drawing attendance zone lines; and 

designing inter- and intra-district transfer systems. 

Similarly, the postsecondary guidance offers ways for colleges and universities to 

pursue diversity through admissions, pipeline programs, recruitment, outreach, 

mentoring, tutoring, retention, and student support programs.

“I think it gives us a frame to start being 

more aggressive.”

—Terri Harris Reed

Vice Provost for Diversity and Inclusion

George Washington University

“Federal rules change allows for 

race-aware admission”

The GW Hatchet, December 8, 2011

“A road map to combat the harms of racial 

isolation and promote the benefits of 

diversity.”

—Khin Mai Aung

Director, Educational Equity Program 

Asian-American Legal Defense and 

Education Fund

“Universities can consider 

race in student admission”

The Daily Iowan, December 8, 2011 

“Very welcome” and “very useful.” 

—Ada Meloy

General Counsel

American Council on Education 

“Guidance on Diversity”

Inside HigherEd, December 5, 2011

“An excellent step in the right direction.”

—Georgina Dodge

Chief Diversity Officer

University of Iowa

“Universities can consider 

race in student admission”

The Daily Iowan, December 8, 2011

Praise for the 2011 Guidance 

Regarding the Voluntary Pursuit of Racial Diversity

“It’s expanding and clarifying the authority 

of school districts to act, if they wish to act.”

—Gary Orfield

Co-Director

Civil Rights Project

“School districts can use race 

in decision-making, feds say”

Seattle Times, December 2, 2011

“ An important re-affirmation of the federal 

government’s commitment to the vital work 

of redeeming the promise of Brown.”

—John Payton

President and Director-Counsel

NAACP Legal Defense and 

Educational Fund

Press Release, December 2, 2011

“The Obama administration makes a 

convincing case that it’s in the nation’s best 

long-term interest to make diversity a part 

of this country’s competitive edge.”

—Sam Fulwood III

“Race and Beyond: We Need 

Diversity in Education”

Center for American Progress, 

December 6, 2011

“A clear and accurate statement of what 

the Supreme Court has said.”

—Dennis Parker

Director, ACLU Racial Justice Program

“New federal policy supports considering 

race in college admissions practices”

AnnArbor.com, December 2, 2011
37

Helping

t

o

Ensure

Equal

Access

t

o

Educati

o

n

The choice as to whether to pursue diversity and reduce racial isolation lies with 

educational and civic leaders. OCR is ready to help educational leaders who make 

this choice.

Enforcement—Voluntary Pursuit of Racial Diversity 

OCR investigates and resolves a broad range of cases involving challenges 

to the use of race or national origin to help achieve diversity at the K–12 and 

postsecondary levels and in combating racial isolation at the K–12 level. In addition, 

OCR investigates allegations that certain institutions covertly and discriminatorily 

consider race or national origin in their decision-making. 

At the K–12 level, OCR’s cases address whether public school districts have lawfully 

considered race in student assignment to schools, K–12 admissions processes, 

school assignment lotteries, school zoning, closures and site selection, and student 

recruitment, mentoring and support programs. 

In one K–12 case, OCR determined that the use of family income, parental 

education and residence in a ZIP Code with concentrated poverty to select students 

for admission to unique public school programs in order to achieve the benefits of 

socioeconomic diversity was not racial discrimination, even though these criteria 

correlated with race. 

Cases at the higher education level have addressed whether colleges are legally 

pursuing diversity by considering race or national origin in admissions, financial aid 

programs and student recruitment, or mentoring and support programs. Specific 

complaints involve the following questions:

► Whether an urban university’s mentoring and support program that focused on 

African-American males was open to all without admitting or excluding students 

on the basis of their race, one of the ways a race-themed mentoring and support 

program is permissible under Title VI. 

► Whether a university admissions system that considered an applicant’s race 

to achieve the compelling educational benefits of diversity did so in a narrowly 

tailored manner, consistent with Supreme Court decisions.

► Whether the use of institutional or third-party scholarships for students of color in 

order to further campus diversity complies with Title VI.

In these cases, OCR recognized the colleges’ compelling interests in the educational 

benefits that flow from a diverse student body in helping them to fulfill their missions. 

So long as these institutions were acting within the bounds of the law provided by 

the Supreme Court, as explained by the OCR and DOJ guidance, their efforts at 

diversity were not found to violate Title VI.

Technical Assistance

OCR’s Title VI enforcement efforts also include technical assistance regarding Title 

VI standards addressing the permissible consideration of race or national origin to 

achieve diversity or reduce racial isolation in accordance with OCR’s 2011 guidance.
38

Office

f

o

r

Civil

Rights

Issue: Enforcing Longstanding Desegregation Orders 

Building on the Supreme Court’s Brown v. Board of Education10 decision, Congress 

enacted Title VI to outlaw racial segregation and other forms of discrimination. From 

the law’s passage in 1964 through the 1970s, OCR placed a primary emphasis 

on eliminating unconstitutional segregation in the Southern and Border states 

in elementary, secondary and postsecondary schools. OCR investigations also 

found that school districts in other regions violated Title VI through the operation 

of intentionally segregated, dual school systems. The hallmark of unlawful racial 

segregation was state-imposed racially separate schools and programs that were 

often accompanied by denials of equal educational resources and opportunities for 

African-American students. 

As at the K–12 level, states operated racially segregated systems of higher 

education that barred African-Americans from enrolling in certain institutions––

while providing inferior opportunities through public Historically Black Colleges and 

Universities (HBCUs) that were constrained by limited missions, inadequate state 

resources, and other substantial forms of discrimination. Beginning in the late 

1960s, OCR required formerly de jure segregated state systems of higher education 

to submit plans to desegregate traditionally white institutions and to end the states’

denial of equal opportunities for students attending HBCUs.

Under Title VI standards informed by Supreme Court decisions and interpreted in 

OCR policy, OCR requires public schools and state systems of higher education to 

eliminate the vestiges of past intentional segregation of students based on race.11

OCR leads investigations and collaborations to ensure that previously segregated 

schools and districts further racial desegregation. In keeping with its historical 

mission, OCR also investigates complaints that institutions are segregating students 

or offering them separate and unequal educational resources or opportunities on the 

basis of race, color, or national origin.

Sub-issue: K–12 Resources and Opportunities

At the K–12 level, OCR’s enforcement of Title VI to stop segregation of schools, 

programs, resources and opportunities by race and national origin has included 

actions such as the following:

► A school district was planning to open a new charter school, but it appeared that 

the school would be nearly all white, in violation of the district’s longstanding 

desegregation plan. At the district’s request, OCR helped it devise a plan to 

ensure that the new school increased its African-American student enrollment, 

staff, leadership and governance as well as its outreach and recruitment in the 

district’s growing Hispanic community. Failure to meet the minority enrollment, 

staff, leadership and governance targets could jeopardize the continued 

existence of the school.

■ Today, the charter school has increased its population of minority students 

and is on track to meet the goals of its desegregation agreement.

10 347 U.S. 483 (1954). 11 59 Fed. Reg. 4271 (Jan. 31, 1994).
39

Helping

t

o

Ensure

Equal

Access

t

o

Educati

o

n

■ Minority parents have been among the strongest advocates for the 

continued operation of the school, stating that the school was the best 

opportunity for their children. 

► OCR also helped a district under a longstanding desegregation plan to revise its 

approach to opening a new high school that would have been over 80 percent 

African-American (in contrast with districtwide enrollment of 34 percent AfricanAmerican).

■ The revised plan combated racial segregation and resource disparities 

by providing all students at the new school a range of programs and 

activities comparable to those provided at the district’s other high schools, 

implementing research-based programs to improve completion and 

dropout rates, and offering a sought-after early college program at the 

school that would attract students throughout the district.

■ This program, offered in conjunction with a local college, will allow 

students at the high school to earn associate degrees in a variety of highdemand fields (including electronics and telecommunications, design 

technology, criminal justice, and health sciences) at the same time as their 

high school diplomas.

■ The new high school recently received a $100,000 grant from an 

international company that develops educational tools, technologies and 

services for use by school districts. The company will create a high-tech 

center to develop equipment, hardware and software, as well as furniture 

tailored to the technology, at the new high school. Moreover, the high 

school will house a sophisticated education technology classroom. 

■ As a result of the programs implemented at the new high school, student 

diversity has steadily increased.

Sub-issue: Higher Education Desegregation Orders

At the postsecondary level, in recent years, OCR has renewed its commitment 

to enforce higher education desegregation plans that were still in place and had 

been adopted long ago by six of the states (Pennsylvania, Maryland, Florida, Ohio, 

Oklahoma and Texas) that previously ran de jure segregated higher education 

systems. OCR is committed to actively monitoring the progress of these states 

in implementing their agreements and eliminating the vestiges of state-imposed 

segregation. OCR’s reinvigorated monitoring has shown positive results.

► In one state, duplication of high-demand professional and doctoral programs at a 

Historically Black College or University and Traditionally White Institutions has been 

a significant problem. OCR is working with the state higher education system and 

the HBCU’s officials to develop a plan to offset unnecessary program duplication 

by developing new, unique HBCU programs, among other means. Importantly, 

after OCR raised concerns, the state adopted a new regulation requiring that all 

new programs be analyzed to prevent unnecessary program duplication.

► OCR sent letters to five of the governors of states with higher education 

desegregation plans reminding them of their obligations to provide sufficient 
40

Office

f

o

r

Civil

Rights

funding to their HBCUs, notwithstanding potential higher education budget cuts in 

their states. After the governors received the letters, the final budgets of at least 

two states cut less funds from HBCUs than was originally proposed—in one of 

these states, $2 million was restored for an HBCU. 

► In one state, the HBCU’s operational funding, capital funding, accreditation 

and facilities have been major concerns during the monitoring of the 

state’s 1998 agreement with OCR. Following a number of OCR visits to 

the HBCU and discussions with the state’s board of higher education, the 

state approved $19 million from the capital budget for the construction of 

a new student university center, resolving one of the major outstanding 

commitments from the 1998 agreement.

Sub-issue: Magnet Schools Assistance Program

OCR plays a critical role in implementing the Magnet Schools Assistance Program 

(MSAP), a program that provides financial assistance to school districts seeking to 

improve educational programs and to reduce, prevent, or eliminate minority-group 

isolation. The MSAP statute requires OCR to determine that the applicant school 

district is not discriminating in a number of areas, including hiring, promotion or 

assignment of employees, and assignment of students to schools and to courses of 

instruction within the schools. In addition, OCR analyzes whether the plans comply 

with Title VI. Over the last four years, after careful analyses, OCR has approved 

nearly 200 applications. 

In FY 2010, OCR reviewed numerous voluntary desegregation plans submitted by 

applicants for grants under interim final MSAP regulations. The interim regulations 

amended the MSAP regulations to provide greater flexibility to school districts in 

designing their desegregation plans and collaborated to ensure MSAP interim 

regulations provide appropriate flexibility. 

Over the last four years, OCR also provided extensive, individualized technical 

assistance to all MSAP applicants that were within funding range. For example, 

OCR worked intensively with one district to address civil rights concerns about 

programs available in the magnet schools, as well as to determine the legal status 

of the magnet schools in relation to the district’s federal court order. OCR worked 

with another district to revise its student selection process for the magnet schools to 

ensure that students with disabilities were able to participate in magnet programs to 

the fullest extent.

Issue: The Right to Equal Treatment

Under Title VI, OCR works to ensure equal access to education services and 

benefits and to prevent acts of retaliation against those who report Title VI violations. 

Title VI prohibits treating individuals differently on the basis of race, color, or national 

origin when providing services or benefits.
41

Helping

t

o

Ensure

Equal

Access

t

o

Educati

o

n

Enforcement—Equal Treatment 

OCR has investigated allegations of different treatment of students based on 

race, color, or national origin and addressed allegations of the denial of access 

to academic programs and extracurricular activities. Examples at the K–12 level 

include:

► Minority students not being able to participate in certain academic programs, 

receiving inaccurate grades and being denied the opportunity to participate on 

athletic teams.

► Minority students receiving unequal access to charter and magnet schools or to 

special education services in such schools.

► Minority students being inappropriately and disproportionately categorized as 

having an intellectual disability, emotionally disturbed and learning disabled.

Remedies for cases like the above can include opportunities to participate in 

denied programs, compensation for lost opportunities, grade corrections active 

encouragement of excluded minority students to enroll and participate in the 

programs at issue, and review of improper special education determinations.

At the postsecondary level, OCR has examined claims that students, on the basis 

of race, color, or national origin, have received different treatment or been denied 

access in the following areas:

► Admissions—such as a claim that a Native American or a Hispanic student was 

denied admission because of race or national origin. 

► Registration—such as a claim that an Asian-American student was not registered 

for classes as promptly as other students based on race. 

► Benefits—such as a claim that an African-American student was treated rudely 

and dismissively based on race when seeking tutoring services. 

► Programs and Activities—such as claims that students were forced to withdraw 

or were dismissed from programs and activities because of their race, color or 

national origin.

Possible remedies for cases like the above include admission or readmission of the 

student, reimbursement for tuition and expenses, staff training and letters of apology.

Cross-Cutting Issues 

OCR investigates and resolves matters holistically, attempting to root out multiple 

manifestations of discrimination.

For example, OCR launched a compliance review of a large school district initially 

to determine whether EL students, who composed approximately one-third of the 

district’s population, were provided with meaningful access to the core curricular 

content, but the investigation was expanded to address unequal treatment of AfricanAmerican students as well. 

OCR found that only 3 percent of the EL high school students were proficient, or 

performing at grade level, in math and English. The district failed to provide an 
42

Office

f

o

r

Civil

Rights

effective program for English language development and meaningful access to the 

core curricular content for EL students.

► EL students were expected to acquire full proficiency in English in six years. 

However, 75 percent of those students did not meet this goal, and after they 

exited the EL program the vast majority of these students did not have support 

classes or a curriculum designed to address their language deficits. Rather, they 

were left to languish in programs taught in English, unable to access core content 

and therefore failing and repeating courses. 

► Parents of EL students did not understand how the EL program worked, and 

translation and interpretation services were sometimes inaccurate. 

In addition, given the disparity in academic achievement between African-American 

and white elementary school students in the district, coupled with concerns raised by 

the community and policymakers, OCR also investigated whether disparate resource 

allocation existed between racially concentrated African-American and white 

elementary schools in the district. 

A voluntary resolution with the district resulted in the most significant step forward for 

improving educational opportunities for EL students and ensuring the comparability 

of resources for African- American students in this district to date. 

Under the resolution, the district will revise its entire program for EL students, 

creating a new English Learner Master Plan with systems to evaluate the program’s 

success in teaching students English. The plan also includes enhanced professional 

development to support teachers in strengthening their instruction of EL students.

The agreement also requires the district to accelerate its efforts to close the 

achievement and opportunity gap for African-American students. The district will 

expand access to the full range of educational resources they need to learn—from 

technology and library materials to fair access to gifted and talented programs. 

The district also developed a plan to take steps to eliminate inequitable and 

disproportionate discipline. Moreover, the district will institute a first-of-its-kind pilot 

project for a community school in a predominantly African-American neighborhood 

that will provide wrap-around health and social services. This school could become 

a sustainable and replicable model for promoting African-American student success.

In addition, the agreement required the district to increase its focus on college- and 

career-ready curricula and programs for both EL and African-American students, 

ensure access to needed supports, including effective teachers to accelerate student 

progress, and provide parents and students with information and support so students 

can prepare for success in postsecondary education and careers.

Title IX: Discrimination on the Basis of Sex 

Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 prohibits discrimination on the 

basis of sex in all education programs and activities operated by recipients of 

federal funds. It states: “No person in the United States shall, on the basis of sex, 

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

discrimination under any educational program or activity receiving Federal financial 

assistance.”
43

Helping

t

o

Ensure

Equal

Access

t

o

Educati

o

n

Admissions 96

Athletics 1,264

Different Treatment/Exclusion/Denial of Benefits 635

Discipline 178

Dissemination of Policy 17

Employment 258

Financial Assistance/Scholarships 57

Grading 80

Pregnancy/Parenting-Related 59

Procedural Requirements 237

Retaliation 663

Sexual Harassment/Sexual Violence 1,137

Other 195

Exhibit 13: Number of Title IX Issues Raised in OCR Complaints, 

Broken Down by Issue, FY 2009–12

Total Number of Complaints Raising Title IX Issues, FY 2009–12 = 4,138.

Note: A single complaint can raise multiple issues; therefore the total 

number of issues raised will exceed the number of complaints received.

Policy 

OCR has also issued three policy guidance documents that pertain to Title IX on 

(1) schools’ obligations to prevent and address sexual violence; (2) the proper way 

to gauge student interest for purposes of providing equitable athletic opportunities 

to members of both sexes; and (3) schools’ obligations to respond to bullying and 

harassment based on sex.

Enforcement 

OCR enforces Title IX’s prohibition of all forms of sex discrimination, including 

gender-based harassment, sexual harassment, and sexual violence. Over the last 

four years, OCR has received 4,138 Title IX complaints and launched 37 proactive 

large-scale compliance reviews and directed inquiries. 

Technical Assistance 

Training for educators, families and community members can equip them to uphold 

and protect students’ civil rights. OCR staff deliver hundreds of technical assistance 

events each year, including 158 events addressing Title IX issues in FY 2012 alone.
44

Office

f

o

r

Civil

Rights

Issue: Prohibiting Sexual Assault and Violence on Campus

Too often, women and girls are victims of sexual harassment or sexual violence. 

About one in five women will be a victim of sexual assault or attempted sexual 

assault while in college, as will about 6 percent of undergraduate men.12 Public 

high school students reported nearly 3,600 incidents of sexual battery and over 600 

rapes and attempted rapes in a recent year.13 Through policy guidance, proactive 

investigations, complaint resolution, and other responses to events around the 

country, OCR aims to ensure that no student fears for his or her safety or loses out 

on educational benefits and opportunities because of sexual violence.

Policy—Sexual Violence 

OCR issued a first-of-its-kind policy guidance in April 2011 to ensure that schools 

and colleges fully understand their Title IX obligations relating to sexual violence. 

The guidance advises institutions on how they can prevent sexual violence from 

occurring and ensure it gets identified and reported when it does occur. The 

guidance explains institutions’ responsibility to resolve complaints of sexual violence 

promptly and equitably, and to respond to any incident of sexual violence swiftly and 

effectively. It includes examples of the types of remedies institutions can implement 

for the victim and the entire school community. It also describes proactive 

measures schools and colleges can take to prevent sexual violence. Additionally, 

the guidance emphasizes the need to keep students notified of nondiscrimination 

and anti-harassment policies and to involve law enforcement agencies when 

necessary. Since the guidance’s release, dozens of colleges and universities have 

made changes to their policies and procedures consistent with the guidance, and 

institutions continue to work together to develop better practices for dealing with 

sexual violence.

Enforcement—Sexual Violence 

OCR received more than 120 complaints relating to sexual violence and launched 

11 proactive investigations on sexual violence in the last four years. These have 

led to groundbreaking remedies such as implementing procedures by which schools 

address sexual violence as a Title IX civil rights issue, rather than leaving this matter 

to be handled only by the criminal justice system; providing interim protection and 

services for victims of sexual violence; systematizing cooperation between school 

officials and local law enforcement authorities to ensure Title IX investigations are 

completed promptly; conducting climate surveys; establishing advisory committees 

comprising students, faculty, and community members to monitor the school climate 

and advise the school’s administration; conducting peer-to-peer sexual harassment 

training; and publicizing school policies so that students know where and with whom 

to file reports and what to expect from the process. 

12 Christopher P. Krebs et al., The Campus Sexual Assault Study Final Report xiii, 5-5 (National Criminal Justice Reference 

Service, Oct. 2007). 13 National Center for Education Statistics, Indicators of School Crime and Safety: 2011. Available at http://nces.ed.gov/programs/crimeindicators/crimeindicators2011/tables/table_06_1.asp.
45

Helping

t

o

Ensure

Equal

Access

t

o

Educati

o

n

The facts surrounding the sexual violence cases investigated and resolved by OCR 

are often tragic. 

► In one college, several incidents of 

student-on-student sexual assault 

had occurred. The college referred 

the complaints to the police for 

treatment solely as a criminal 

matter while other sexual assaults 

took place, notwithstanding the 

college’s Title IX obligation to 

address the incidents through 

in-school measures. In another, 

a local prosecutor threatened 

to charge college officials with 

obstruction of justice when they 

tried to conduct the school’s Title 

IX investigation while the criminal 

investigation was pending. In 

a third, a student was found 

murdered in her dorm room after 

a fellow student had allegedly 

sneaked into her room, raped 

her, and then smothered her with 

a pillow; for ten weeks school 

officials maintained that no foul 

play was involved. 

► In another case, three victims 

did not receive an equitable 

hearing—they were made to sit 

very close to the accused; the 

accused was allowed to review 

evidence in advance of the 

hearing while the accusers were 

not; the accused was allowed to 

question the complainant and 

the two other accusers directly, 

including questions about their 

sexual histories; the accused, but 

not the accusers, was allowed to 

present character witnesses; and 

a victim was not allowed to present 

a witness to testify regarding the 

underlying events. 

► OCR has also launched two proactive systemwide investigations into K–12 

school districts where gang rape allegedly occurred; in one case, the rape 

was allegedly committed by nonstudents as well as students. Investigations 

Technical Assistance: Sexual Violence

OCR has heard from many experts around 

the country about how critical it is for OCR to 

be proactive in its outreach to colleges and 

communities on the issue of sexual violence 

on campus. In response, OCR has launched 

a number of large-scale technical assistance 

and outreach initiatives on this issue. These 

forums are designed to bring together experts 

in the field of campus sexual assault to 

discuss the latest research, policies, legal 

challenges, interdisciplinary collaborations

 and reporting issues. 

For example, OCR’s “Title IX and Sexual 

Assault: Exploring New Paradigms for 

Prevention and Response” conference 

focused on the problem of sexual violence 

on college campuses, and how to respond 

to and prevent it. Over 350 people from the 

New England area attended, including college 

staff, college attorneys, researchers and law 

enforcement personnel. Topics addressed 

during the conference included colleges’ 

responsibilities under Title IX; working 

with sexual assault victims; responding to 

reports or complaints of sexual assault; and 

prevention strategies. 

Similar events held around the country 

have created a critical dialogue and have 

resulted in requests for technical assistance 

by numerous colleges and universities on 

Title IX compliance and the development of 

effective policies and procedures. In addition, 

these OCR forums have created networks of 

practitioners in this area. 
46

Office

f

o

r

Civil

Rights

uncovered widespread peer-to-peer sexual violence and harassment suffered by 

middle and high school students as well as evidence of teacher-student violence 

or harassment.

► Where appropriate, OCR also works with the local prosecutor’s office and police 

department to ensure that the college will be able to meet its Title IX obligation to 

conduct prompt investigations when it receives complaints of sexual harassment, 

even if there is a concurrent criminal investigation; and OCR requires the school 

to publish revised Title IX grievance procedures and nondiscrimination notices, to 

develop a Title IX training program for students and staff, and to conduct periodic 

assessments of campus climate to assess the effectiveness of its efforts to 

respond to and prevent sexual misconduct.

► In addition, OCR has required schools and colleges to ensure that victims of 

harassment are provided services as needed, even before the outcome of the 

Title IX or criminal investigations, which can include counseling and academic 

support services, compensatory services and interim remedies. OCR has made 

it clear that hearings must be equitable—and what is provided to the accused 

during the hearing, such as the ability to present witnesses and the right to an 

appeal, must also be provided to the victim. OCR has also made clear that 

schools and colleges must keep accurate records and monitor progress in 

creating a safer campus in part by conducting community meetings and periodic 

assessments of the campus climate.

Issue: Equal Access to Athletic Opportunities and Benefits

From scholarships to placement on teams to other athletic program resources 

such as facilities, coaching, and equipment, women and girls still do not have 

equal access to opportunities and benefits in athletics. Although there has been 

undisputable progress since Title IX was enacted, women and girls continue to 

represent a disproportionately low percentage of college and high school athletes 

when compared to their enrollment rates. Women make up 57 percent of college 

students but receive only 43 percent of positions on varsity sports teams.14 And 

girls make up roughly half of all high school students but receive only 41 percent of 

positions on varsity sports teams.15

Policy—Athletics 

As part of an ongoing effort to ensure the equal opportunities guaranteed by Title 

IX, OCR issued policy guidance in April 2010 clarifying how it assesses whether an 

institution is providing nondiscriminatory athletic participation opportunities based on 

its students’ interests and abilities, under the “Three-Part Test” previously articulated by 

OCR. The guidance reinstated the Department’s longstanding policy that it will analyze 

multiple indicators to determine whether the school’s athletics program is meeting the 

interests and abilities of the school’s underrepresented sex, usually women. 

14 NCAA Sports Sponsorship and Participation Rates Report Student Athlete Participation 1981/1982-2010-2011. Available at: 

http://www.ncaapublications.com/productdownloads/PR2012.pdf. 15 National Federation of State High School Associations 2010-11 High School Athletes Participation Survey. Available at: 

http://www.nfhs.org/content.aspx?id=3282.
47

Helping

t

o

Ensure

Equal

Access

t

o

Educati

o

n

“Much progress has been made 

over the past 38 years in women’s 

athletics participation. Going back 

to the 1996 standard of measuring 

interest in women’s sports will help 

ensure that continued progress is 

made and future generations of 

young women will have [the same] 

equal opportunities as young men.”

—Jim Isch

Interim President, NCAA

“Biden Announces Change in Title 

IX Women’s Sports Policy”

CNN, April 10, 2010

The letter withdrew policy guidance issued 

in 2005 that had inappropriately changed the 

Department’s longstanding policy and allowed 

institutions to rely on a single email survey to 

assess the interests of the underrepresented 

sex. The 2005 policy further permitted 

institutions to count nonresponses to the survey 

as indicating a lack of interest in athletics. 

Thus, a low response rate leads institutions to 

significantly underestimate the interests and 

abilities of their students while appearing to 

comply with Title IX. 

OCR’s April 2010 policy guidance ensures 

that institutions will be held accountable for 

meeting the full range of athletic interests 

and abilities of the underrepresented sex. 

The letter also provides institutions with 

recommendations for developing effective procedures for collecting, maintaining, 

and evaluating information on students’ interests and abilities, as this information 

is critical to determining whether institutions are providing nondiscriminatory 

athletic opportunities. 

Enforcement—Athletics 

OCR’s investigations have ensured that thousands of female students at an array 

of schools, including some with highly visible athletic programs, have an equal 

opportunity to participate in varsity sports. Over the last four years, OCR initiated 17 

proactive investigations of possible Title IX violations in athletics programs. During 

the same time period, OCR received more than 1,250 complaints from students, 

parents, coaches, and others alleging Title IX violations in athletics programs. 

Where appropriate, OCR has obtained 

resolution agreements from school districts 

and universities to ensure that female 

students have an equal opportunity to 

participate in sports programs. Institutions 

have agreed with OCR to take steps 

such as providing female athletes with 

additional financial aid, adding new teams, 

and ensuring that female athletes have 

comparable quality coaching, facilities, 

equipment and other athletics-related 

benefits. Some examples of OCR’s cases 

in this area are the following: 

► OCR is investigating fundraising 

by athletic booster clubs predominantly for male teams to determine if this is 

creating inequities in benefits between male and female athletes in violation of 

Title IX.

“The bottom line is that it will make us a 

better athletic program....Now the Office 

for Civil Rights is saying you can do 

better. That’s our challenge, this is our 

opportunity.”

—Tom Childress

Sr. Vice President Catawba College

“Catawba Out of Compliance With Title IX” 

Salisbury Post, November 6, 2010
48

Office

f

o

r

Civil

Rights

► In another investigation of an entire sports league, OCR is ensuring equal 

opportunities for secondary school athletes by requiring the league and 

its member school districts to equitably treat female and male students in 

“primetime” scheduling of athletic events, in scheduling of practice times and in 

providing publicity for their events.

► OCR obtained redress for women athletes at a university that was providing 

significantly fewer and inferior resources to its women’s sports teams in 

comparison to the men’s programs. Among other things, the university failed to 

maintain adequate equipment and locker room facilities for its female athletes, 

who were forced to change in cars and sheds. Female student athletes often 

received inferior medical and training services from less experienced staff. In 

addition, unlike the men’s teams, when the women’s teams went on “away” 

games, they were crowded into hotel rooms or had to make long journeys back 

home on the same day as their games. A robust resolution agreement between 

the university and OCR resulted in the construction of upgraded practice and 

competitive facilities, new and improved locker rooms, appropriately sized 

equipment and other equitable treatment for the women’s athletic program.

► OCR helped expand opportunities for girls in a school district that had roughly 

equal enrollment of boys and girls but a 57 to 43 percent split between boys’ and 

girls’ participation in interscholastic athletics. OCR negotiated an agreement with 

the district that resulted in athletic participation opportunities for girls and boys 

that are substantially proportionate to their respective enrollments, without cutting 

any sports or spots on individual teams. The district has hired a new athletic 

director with significant Title IX experience; added girls’ sports teams, such 

as bowling, water polo, and wrestling; developed outreach activities at middle 

schools to encourage participation in interscholastic athletics; and created an 

athletics improvement committee.

Issue: Equal Access to Comparable Educational Opportunities 

(Including College- and Career-Preparatory Programs) 

While women and girls have made great progress in an array of fields of study, 

female students remain underrepresented in some of the most rigorous math and 

science courses. This mixed picture is shown in OCR’s CRDC—the data reveal that 

girls, who compose 49 percent of the CRDC sample set, are equitably represented 

in Geometry and Algebra II, but girls represent 47 percent of students taking Physics 

and 48 percent of students taking AP Math (Calculus and Statistics) and are less 

likely to take and pass AP tests than their male peers. 

In higher education, in 2008–09, women earned fewer than 18 percent of all 

bachelor’s degrees in computer and information sciences, and women from 

underrepresented minorities earned less than 7 percent of bachelor’s degrees in 

computer and information sciences. Similarly, fewer than 17 percent of all bachelor’s 

degrees in engineering were awarded to women, and less than 4 percent were 

awarded to women from underrepresented minorities.16

16 Digest of Education Statistics 2010, Table 316. Available at http://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/2010-menu_tables.asp. See 

also http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/wmpd/minwomen.cfm.
49

Helping

t

o

Ensure

Equal

Access

t

o

Educati

o

n

Enforcement—College- and Career-Readiness and Success 

OCR works to ensure gender equity in access to courses and to career training. 

► For example, in one proactive investigation of a school district, OCR is examining 

the underrepresentation of girls in advanced math and science courses. OCR’s 

goals for a resolution in this type of case include the development of policies and 

procedures to ensure fair and equitable access to AP STEM courses for female 

high school students as well as better preparation of K–8 female students for 

their future success in such courses.

► In a similar proactive investigation of a community college, OCR is examining the 

disparity between male and female participation and graduation rates and degree 

attainment in programs traditionally dominated by men, like engineering and 

computer science. 

► A third example responded to the insults and harassment experienced by the 

sole female student in a college’s aviation maintenance technology program. 

The harassment was so severe that the student was forced to drop out of the 

program. In that case, the college and OCR reached a resolution that helped 

both the individual student as well as the overall college community. The 

resolution agreement required the college to reimburse the student for the 

educational costs she incurred while attending the college, and to eradicate the 

culture of hostility by, for example, issuing an anti-discrimination statement to 

students and staff, revising its nondiscrimination and anti-harassment policies 

and procedures, and providing training for staff. 

Section 504 and Title II: 

Discrimination on the Basis of Disability

OCR protects the rights of persons with disabilities under two federal laws. One of 

these is Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, which prohibits discrimination 

based on disability in programs and activities operated by recipients of federal funds. 

It states: “No otherwise qualified individual with a disability in the United States...

shall, solely by reason of her or his disability, be excluded from the participation in, 

be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any program or 

activity receiving Federal financial assistance....”17

The other law is Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA), which 

prohibits discrimination based on disability by public entities, regardless of whether 

they receive federal financial assistance.18 Title II states: “[N]o qualified individual 

with a disability shall, by reason of such disability, be excluded from participation in 

or be denied the benefits of the services, programs, or activities of a public entity, or 

be subjected to discrimination by any such entity.”19

17 Section 504 also prohibits disability discrimination in programs and activities conducted by the federal government. The 

Department’s Office of Management rather than OCR has authority to enforce this aspect of Section 504. 18 Pursuant to a delegation by the U.S. attorney general, OCR shares in the enforcement of Title II with DOJ and other federal 

agencies. OCR, along with DOJ, enforces Title II at all public institutions, including public elementary and secondary 

schools, colleges and universities, as well as at public libraries. 19 Title III of the ADA prohibits disability discrimination by private entities, including private schools, colleges and universities. 

DOJ enforces Title III. Information about Title III can be found on the DOJ website at www.ada.gov.
50

Office

f

o

r

Civil

Rights

Policy 

Since January 2009, OCR has issued four guidance documents that address or 

include topics related to disability rights: (1) equal access to electronic book readers 

and other technology for postsecondary students with disabilities; (2) equal access 

to emerging technologies for all students, including elementary and secondary 

school students; (3) schools’ obligations to respond to bullying and harassment 

based on disability; and (4) changes in the meaning of “disability” made by the ADA 

Amendments Act of 2008.

Enforcement

In the fiscal years 2009 through 2012, OCR received over 16,107 disabilityrelated complaints—more than ever before in a four-year period. This figure 

also represents more than 55 percent of the complaints OCR received during 

this four-year period. In addition, in the last four fiscal years, OCR launched 34 

systemic, proactive investigations that, collectively, addressed a broad range of 

Academic Adjustments 2,153

Accessibility (programs/facilities) 689

Accessibility (technology)~ 14

Admissions and Recruitment 306

Different Treatment/Exclusion/Denial of Benefits 2,580

Disability Harassment 1,513

Discipline 1,034

Employment 460

Free Appropriate Public Education 6,400

Graduation Requirements 162

Minority in Special ED 27

Non-Academic Services 483

Procedural Requirements 460

Retaliation 3,102

Seclusion & Restraint~ 70

Testing 168

Treatment of Postsecondary Students 431

Other 1,200

Exhibit 14: Number of Disability Issues Raised in OCR Complaints, 

Broken Down by Issue, FY 2009–12

Total Number of Complaints, FY 2009–12 = 16,107.

Note: A single complaint can raise multiple issues; therefore the total 

number of issues raised will exceed the number of complaints received.

~ Data collections start in FY 2011.
51

Helping

t

o

Ensure

Equal

Access

t

o

Educati

o

n

disability-related issues in institutions across the country. OCR has employed 

innovative techniques to resolve many of these complaints and investigations, 

often involving multiple stakeholders to design and sustain meaningful change at 

the institutions involved.

Technical Assistance

Education and outreach form a critical element of OCR’s strategy for securing 

the rights of students with disabilities. In the last four years, OCR has conducted 

hundreds of disability-related technical assistance events, including 221 events in FY 

2012 alone.

Issue: Free Appropriate Public Education (FAPE)

Children with disabilities have the same right to K–12 public education as children 

without disabilities. In order to receive and benefit from that education, students with 

disabilities may need special education and related services. OCR works to ensure 

that public elementary and secondary schools, including charter schools, provide a 

free appropriate public education (FAPE) to all “qualified students” with disabilities 

(generally, students with disabilities who are of school age), regardless of the nature 

or severity of their disabilities.20

Policy—FAPE 

The Department issued policy guidance in 2012 addressing the requirements of 

Title II and Section 504 in the elementary and secondary school context in light of 

changes to these laws made by Congress in 2008 that broadened their scope of 

protection. The guidance explained how, under the amended laws, more students 

may have a disability and require evaluation to determine whether they need special 

education or related aids and services. The guidance also addressed the need for 

schools to revisit health plans developed for some students. Under the amended 

laws’ broadened definition of disability, more students with conditions such as food 

allergies, asthma and diabetes may now be covered by Section 504 and Title II. 

Therefore, schools may need to examine how they are ensuring equal educational 

opportunities for such students, including a review of health plans to ensure that 

schools have met the Section 504 requirements for evaluation, placement, and 

procedural safeguards. The Department also worked with the National Diabetes 

Education Program of the Department of Health and Human Services in updating 

the program’s guidance on how to ensure optimal diabetes management in schools 

in 2010.21

20 The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), a federal law that provides federal funds for special education, also 

has FAPE requirements. IDEA is administered by the Department’s Office of Special Education Programs, in the Office of 

Special Education and Rehabilitative Services. 21 Helping the Student with Diabetes Succeed: A Guide for School Personnel (September 2010), available on the National Diabetes Education Program’s website at http://ndep.nih.gov/publications/Publica-tionDetail.aspx?PubId=97&redirect=true#main.
52

Office

f

o

r

Civil

Rights

Enforcement—FAPE 

In fiscal years 2009 through 2012, OCR 

received 6,400 complaints alleging FAPE 

violations. This is by far the disability issue 

on which OCR receives the most complaints, 

making up almost two-fifths of the more than 

16,000 disability complaints received in this 

time period. During this same period, OCR 

launched over 15 proactive systemwide 

investigations around the country concerning 

the provision of FAPE.

Enforcement—FAPE—Evaluation and 

Placement of Students With Disabilities

► A school district required parents to 

obtain, at their own expense, medical 

documentation supporting the existence of 

disabilities for their children. The district 

also required parents to demonstrate that 

their children were being discriminated 

against before it would conduct an 

evaluation. While school districts can 

consider information submitted by 

parents, districts may not require parents 

to provide diagnostic information or obtain outside assessments of students 

before conducting an evaluation. Furthermore, the failure to evaluate a student 

suspected of having a disability is itself discrimination based on disability; school 

districts may not require parents to demonstrate discrimination before their child 

is evaluated. Pursuant to its agreement with OCR, the district is revising and 

training staff on its referral procedures and forms, and reimbursing parents who 

had paid for evaluations.

► A charter school failed to properly evaluate, in a timely manner, a sixth-grade 

transfer student with a severe, potentially life-threatening peanut allergy 

to determine if she had a disability and needed services to receive FAPE. 

The student had a Section 504 plan at her previous school. Pursuant to 

its agreement with OCR, the school committed to evaluating the student to 

determine if she had a disability and, if so, to developing a Section 504 plan to 

ensure that she received FAPE and could safely attend school. The school also 

notified other parents of students with food allergies of their rights under Section 

504 and developed and provided training on written policies and procedures 

consistent with Section 504.

► OCR facilitated an Early Complaint Resolution in a case in which parents alleged 

that the school district had not fully implemented the individualized education 

program (IEP) developed under IDEA for their child, who had a mood disorder 

disability. Implementation of an IEP is one means of providing FAPE under 

Under Section 504, an “appropriate 

education” is regular or special 

education and related aids and 

services that meet the educational 

needs of students with disabilities 

as adequately as the needs 

of nondisabled students and 

that satisfy certain procedural 

requirements. Public schools must 

evaluate students who, because 

of a disability, may need special 

education or related services; 

determine what those services 

should be; and provide those 

services along with procedural 

safeguards. FAPE requires that 

students with disabilities be 

educated with students without 

disabilities to the maximum extent 

appropriate to meet the needs of 

the students with disabilities.
53

Helping

t

o

Ensure

Equal

Access

t

o

Educati

o

n

Section 504. Following OCR’s intervention, the district agreed to conduct an IEP 

meeting to discuss the parents’ concerns regarding the implementation of the 

IEP and to provide specific notice to the student’s teachers of the obligation to 

implement it. The district also agreed to convene a meeting between the parents 

and the student’s teachers in the new school year to ensure the terms of the IEP 

were being appropriately implemented.

Enforcement—FAPE—Transportation Services

► OCR initiated a statewide investigation of whether children who rode school 

buses specifically for students with disabilities were inappropriately receiving 

a shorter school day and less instructional time compared to students without 

disabilities who did not ride special transport. To settle this case with OCR, the 

state agreed to implement new, statewide standards for ensuring that students 

with disabilities on these bus routes were not receiving a shortened school day 

because of a district’s transportation schedule; conduct audits of school districts’ 

transportation schedules and appoint a coordinator responsible for ensuring that 

districts take corrective steps; require districts to create tracking systems for 

buses; and monitor districts’ implementation of the tracking systems. 

► OCR initiated a proactive investigation to determine whether a large school 

district failed to provide students with disabilities with transportation to and from 

the locations where they were receiving educational services. In its resolution 

with OCR, the district agreed to ensure that students with disabilities received 

the needed transportation services by taking the following steps: publicizing 

and operating a phone system to promptly trouble-shoot transportation issues; 

maintaining a system for reporting monthly on transportation problems and 

their resolution; notifying parents of their right to reimbursement for the costs of 

getting their children to school; determining if students who miss school time due 

to transportation failures are entitled to compensatory education; and providing 

relevant training for school principals.

Issue: Academic Adjustments for Postsecondary Students 

OCR’s work also extends to postsecondary institutions. Students with disabilities 

who meet the academic and technical standards for admission to, or participation 

in, a postsecondary education program are entitled to academic modifications 

and auxiliary aids and services to ensure their equal opportunity to participate 

in the program. A postsecondary student with a disability who wishes to receive 

academic modifications or auxiliary aids and services must inform the college of the 

disability and need for accommodation. Colleges do not have to make changes to 

academic requirements that they can demonstrate are essential to the instruction 

being pursued, nor do they have to provide academic adjustments that they can 

demonstrate would fundamentally alter the institution’s program or would result in 

undue financial and administrative burdens. Short of meeting this high bar, however, 

the costs of providing auxiliary aids and services are not valid reasons for failing to 

provide the aids or services.
54

Office

f

o

r

Civil

Rights

OCR has collaborated with colleges and universities to ensure equal opportunities in 

several ways. For example:

► A college failed to provide sign language interpreters to students with hearing 

impairments. Because of a shortage of interpreters, the college videotaped 

some classes and had students with hearing impairments make appointments 

with interpreters to review the videos, while still requiring the students to attend 

classes even though there was no interpreter. The results: scheduling a separate 

appointment with the interpreter took too much time; the video was going too fast 

for the student to ask the interpreter questions; and students could not ask the 

teacher questions while watching the videotape because the teacher was not 

present. In its resolution with OCR, the college agreed to hire one new part-time 

interpreter; review its entire interpreting system to determine how to meet its 

current needs; and offer affected students the options of retroactively dropping 

classes, obtaining refunds and repeating courses.

► A student alleged that his college discriminated against him by dismissing him 

from its medical office technology program based on his HIV-positive status. 

One course required students to draw blood from each other, and the college had 

expressed safety concerns. To resolve the complaint, the college agreed to offer 

reenrollment to the student, consider his request for the academic adjustment of 

not having other students draw his blood, and develop and provide training on 

procedures to address academic adjustment requests.

► A deaf student in a college’s teacher education program needed a sign language 

interpreter for student teaching. College officials told her that if she used an 

interpreter she might not meet state technical standards for teaching and might 

not pass her student teaching requirement. The college provided inconsistent 

interpreter services and did not make improvements after the student 

complained. After the state department of education clarified that there was no 

state position on whether the use of interpreters during student teaching affected 

a student’s eligibility for teacher certification, the college agreed with OCR to 

consistently provide the student with qualified interpreters, to not consider her 

use of an interpreter in evaluating her student teaching, and to generally provide 

students with appropriate accommodations.

Issue: Discipline

Students with disabilities are often disproportionately disciplined in comparison to 

their peers without disabilities. For example, the CRDC shows that students served 

by IDEA are twice as likely to be suspended out of school as their peers without 

disabilities. (See Exhibit 15.) Statistics alone do not prove a civil rights violation, 

but such disparities can be a cause for concern. In addition, in fiscal years 2009 

through 2012, OCR received over 1,000 complaints alleging disability discrimination 

concerning discipline.

OCR works to protect students with disabilities from violation of their rights in the 

discipline process. Under Section 504 and Title II, students with disabilities may 

not be punished or disciplined for behavior that is caused by or is a manifestation 

of their disabilities. Additionally, students with disabilities must not be subjected to 
55

Helping

t

o

Ensure

Equal

Access

t

o

Educati

o

n

discriminatorily 

different 

treatment in 

discipline, and 

must not be 

disciplined 

more harshly or 

frequently than 

similarly situated 

students without 

disabilities for the 

same infractions.

One example 

of OCR’s work 

in disability 

discipline issues 

involved a parent 

who alleged that 

a school district 

had indefinitely 

suspended 

her son with 

Asperger’s Syndrome without determining whether the student’s behavior was 

caused by or was a manifestation of the student’s disability. The child had brought 

a container of harmless materials to school that the school mistakenly perceived 

as a safety risk. The parent further alleged that the school had neither promptly 

evaluated and placed her son nor provided him special education or related services 

in this matter. OCR facilitated an agreement between the parent and the school 

district in which the district agreed to expedite proper procedures to ensure FAPE; 

allow the student to choose to return to a different high school in the district, with 

transportation, and retake some courses; provide information to the district attorney 

to assist in dropping criminal charges; and conduct an internal review of how it was 

handling this type of situation.

Issue: Accessibility of Technology

Technology plays an increasingly important role in education at all levels. For 

example, schools and colleges commonly use computers in traditional classrooms, 

electronic book readers that supplement or replace paper textbooks, online classes, 

and online registration and class scheduling. Section 504 and Title II require schools 

and colleges to ensure that the technology they use is fully accessible to individuals 

with disabilities or to otherwise provide equal access to the educational benefits and 

opportunities afforded by the technology.

Policy—Accessibility of Technology 

In 2010, in collaboration with DOJ, OCR released guidance on how Section 504 

and the ADA apply to emerging technologies, especially electronic book readers, in 

Exhibit 15: Comparison of Out-of-School Suspension Rates 

for Students with and without Disabilities, 2009–10

Students with Disabilities

(IDEA)

13%

Students without Disabilities

0%

2%

4%

6%

8%

10%

12%

14%

Source: 2009-10 CRDC, Office for Civil Rights, 2012.

Percentage of Students

6%
56

Office

f

o

r

Civil

Rights

education. The guidance, set forth in a letter addressed to college and university 

presidents, makes clear that if an emerging technology is inaccessible to students 

who are blind, then requiring the use of that technology in a classroom is prohibited 

by Section 504 and the ADA. This prohibition is lifted when schools and colleges 

provide blind students with accommodations or modifications that permit them to 

receive all the educational benefits of the program in an equally effective and equally 

integrated manner. Such accommodations must allow blind students to acquire the 

same information, engage in the same interactions and enjoy the same services as 

sighted students. In 2011, OCR issued a follow-up document explaining that the 

principles underlying the 2010 guidance also apply to elementary and secondary 

schools; to students with other disabilities, such as learning disabilities, that affect 

the ability to access printed materials; and to other forms of online or emerging 

technology beyond electronic book readers.

Enforcement—Accessibility of Technology 

As the use of technology in education increases, OCR’s enforcement efforts are 

ensuring that students with disabilities have the same opportunities as students 

without disabilities in this fast-changing area. OCR has initiated two proactive 

reviews to ensure that schools, colleges, and universities are not using technology in 

a way that discriminates against students with disabilities. OCR has also addressed 

complaints in this area, such as the following: 

► Working with a private company, a university established a pilot program to 

provide students with electronic book readers with Web browsers as a source of 

class-related, text-based information. Advocacy organizations alleged that the 

electronic book reader was not accessible to blind and visually impaired students 

and that alternate formats did not provide these students with equal access. 

■ After OCR and DOJ began investigating, the university agreed to require, 

purchase or incorporate electronic book readers into its programs only 

if the readers were fully accessible to students with visual impairments. 

Alternatively, the university also agreed to provide a reasonable 

modification or accommodation that would allow students with visual 

impairments to access and acquire the same information, engage in the 

same interactions and enjoy the same services as sighted students in their 

classes.

► Online colleges, like their brick-and-mortar counterparts, must not discriminate 

against students with disabilities. OCR has seen an increase in complaints filed 

against online colleges in recent years. In one case, for example, a student 

alleged that an online college did not properly accommodate her disabilities 

to allow her to access its paralegal training program. In particular, the student 

wanted extra time to complete assignments and tests. OCR found that the 

college did not have an adequate process for students with disabilities to request 

academic adjustments or accommodations. The college agreed to fully refund 

the student’s tuition; develop a new policy on academic adjustments and auxiliary 

aids and services, as well as a revised grievance procedure to provide for the 
57

Helping

t

o

Ensure

Equal

Access

t

o

Educati

o

n

prompt and equitable resolution of Section 504 issues; and publicize the new 

policies and procedures and train all staff on them.

► A college student with a disability withdrew from an online math class because 

he could not use his testing accommodation, which was extra time for the 

online tests. The software did not allow for untimed testing, and the professor 

would have had to spend about 50 minutes converting each test into a format 

that would work for untimed situations. The college required the student with a 

disability to come in to the testing center during specified hours and take a test 

on paper, while the other students in the class could take the test online, from 

anywhere, at any time during a 48-hour window. OCR found that the online 

program did not provide equal access given that the student with a disability did 

not have the same ease of use and ready access to the test as other students. 

The additional work it would have taken to prepare an untimed online version of 

each test was not an undue burden. Following OCR’s intervention, the college 

reimbursed the student for the cost of the course, cancelled its collection action 

for unpaid tuition, notified credit agencies and trained its staff on providing 

accommodations.

Issue: Physical Accessibility of Programs, Services and Facilities

OCR works with recipients to ensure that persons with disabilities have physical 

access to the programs, services and facilities of schools and colleges. Parts of 

old buildings may need to be renovated, and new buildings need to be properly 

constructed so that individuals with disabilities, including those who use wheelchairs, 

can, among other things, enter and navigate, use bathrooms, and park near the 

buildings.

Enforcement—Accessibility of Programs, Services and Facilities 

In fiscal years 2009 through 2012, OCR received nearly 700 complaints alleging 

violations in the accessibility of programs, services and facilities, and initiated 

three proactive reviews on this topic. Following are some of the issues OCR has 

addressed in this area:

► OCR conducted a proactive review of accessibility at a university campus and 

found compliance problems with, among other things, the slope and size of 

parking spaces; the doors and shelves in bathrooms; the slope of a ramp in 

a building; the pressure required to open some classroom doors; and routes 

blocked by obstacles such as trash cans and picnic tables. The college agreed 

to correct these problems.

► In another proactive accessibility review of a college, the university agreed to 

remedy several concerns, including: providing accessible restrooms in identified 

buildings and facilities; providing accessible seating in the campus basketball 

facility and football stadium; installing audible alarms in the campus auditorium 

building; providing accessible parking on campus; identifying an accessible 

pedestrian route on campus and providing notice of the route to the public; and 

installing appropriate accessibility signage on all building and facility entrances.
58

Office

f

o

r

Civil

Rights

► A complaint alleged that elementary school playgrounds within a school district 

were not accessible for individuals with mobility disabilities. OCR negotiated an 

agreement in which the district committed to spending $2.2 million over eight 

years to make all the elementary school playgrounds accessible for individuals 

with mobility disabilities.

Cross-Cutting Issue: 

Combating School Harassment and Bullying

Bullying and harassment are harmful to students and the learning environment, and 

are far too pervasive in our nation’s schools and colleges. As Secretary Duncan 

explained: “Before we can educate our children, we have to make sure that we 

are keeping them safe. We owe it to our students to provide a safe and healthy 

environment in which to learn.”

Student misconduct that is sufficiently severe or pervasive to interfere with a 

student’s ability to learn may trigger responsibilities under federal civil rights laws. 

First-of-its-kind Policy 

In 2010, OCR issued a “Dear Colleague” letter to discuss racial and national origin 

harassment, sexual harassment, gender-based harassment, and disability 

harassment because the civil rights legal implications of these issues previously had 

not been made adequately clear to recipients. The guidance explains that the civil 

rights laws enforced by OCR require that if an institution knows or has reason to 

know about student-on-student harassment based on race, color, national origin, 

sex, or disability, it must take immediate and effective action to eliminate the 

harassment, prevent its recurrence, and, where appropriate, address its effects on 

the harassed student and the school community. OCR’s policy guidance provides 

examples of harassment and illustrates how a school should respond in each case. 

The guidance also takes the important step of recognizing that harassment against 

students of a particular religion may violate Title VI. Although Title VI does not 

prohibit religious discrimination, members of religious groups who are subjected to 

harassment on the basis of their national origin, including their actual or perceived 

ancestry or ethnic characteristics, are protected by Title VI. For example, bullying 

of Muslim or Jewish students may be based not merely on religious bias, but also 

on bias relating to the students’ perceived ethnic or national origin. Schools thus 

must determine whether harassment against members of religious groups is also 

discrimination based on race, color, or national origin, and, if so, meet their Title VI

obligations in addressing such harassment.

The 2010 guidance document also makes clear that schools may violate Title IX by 

failing to effectively respond to bullying or harassment of LGBT students. Title IX 

does not cover discrimination based solely on sexual orientation, but harassment of 

LGBT students constitutes sex-based discrimination if it is based on the student’s 

failure to conform to sex stereotypes. For example, a student may be bullied 

because he or she does not act or dress according to his or her classmates’ genderbased expectations for boys or girls. In addition, the guidance states that Title IX 
59

Helping

t

o

Ensure

Equal

Access

t

o

Educati

o

n

prohibits sexual harassment 

of all students, regardless 

of their actual or perceived 

sexual orientation or gender 

identity. The guidance reminds 

schools and universities that 

when harassment targets 

LGBT students, includes antigay comments, or is partly 

based on a target’s actual or 

perceived sexual orientation, 

Title IX obligates the institution 

to investigate and remedy any 

overlapping sexual or genderbased harassment of those 

students.

Enforcement 

In fiscal years 2009 through 

2012, OCR received over 1,600 

complaints involving racial or 

national origin harassment, 

more than 1,100 complaints 

involving sexual or genderbased harassment, and nearly 

1,500 complaints of disability 

harassment. During the same 

period, OCR launched 12 

proactive investigations to 

address harassment. 

Enforcement—Racial and 

National Origin Harassment 

Over the last four years, OCR has 

worked with districts and colleges 

on helping to change the culture 

of their schools that gives rise to 

a hostile environment because of 

racial harassment and bullying. 

Some fact patterns encountered 

include the following: 

► Epithets scrawled on school 

walls (for example, swastikas 

scrawled on walls at a 

university housing complex) 

and expressed verbally to 

“The bullying and harassment I suffered eliminated 

my high school experience.” Over 150 students, 

parents and advocates sat silently as Dylan 

recounted his story during a seminar sponsored by 

one of OCR’s Midwestern offices and a state human 

rights commission. The message regarding the 

effects of bullying and harassment were clear as 

Dylan stated that even 10 years later, he was still 

trying to cope with those effects. 

OCR has conducted dozens of technical assistance 

and outreach activities to address and help prevent 

the bullying and harassment of students based 

on sex, race, and disability. Every OCR office has 

conducted bullying and harassment outreach and 

technical assistance. Unfortunately, Dylan’s story is 

all too common.

During another forum, this one a town hall on 

bullying and harassment held jointly by OCR and 

the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Northern District 

of Ohio, four student panelists (one AfricanAmerican male, two Arabic Muslim females, and 

one gay male) shared their stories about how they 

have been subjected to bullying and harassment 

in their various Ohio schools and how they have 

responded. 

They, along with an adult panelist representing 

advocacy and support groups, answered text 

and email questions from over 1,000 students 

participating remotely from over 40 schools, as well 

as to questions from over 100 students in the studio 

audience. Based on the panelists’ stories and the 

students’ questions of the participating students and 

the stories of the panelists, it was clear that bullying 

and harassment in schools, particularly through the 

use of social media, remains a significant problem. 

The gay male panelist, now a senior deciding where 

he will go to college, shared how as a result of 

the bullying he endured his freshman year in high 

school, he attempted suicide. The lesson was 

powerful and clear. Such dialogue on this important 

topic—as well as putting positive action behind 

the words—will go a long way toward eradicating 

bullying and harassment in our nation’s schools. 
60

Office

f

o

r

Civil

Rights

students (calling African-American students “n** *,” Arab students “sand n***” 

and Jewish students “dirty Jew”) and other derogatory and offensive comments 

(African-American students being told by other students to “pick cotton” and that 

“my people owned your people,” Somali students being called “freeloaders” who 

do not work and receive “unfair privileges” such as time off to pray and being 

allowed to wear religious head garb in school). 

► White high school students dressing in “hip-hop” attire and referring to one of 

homecoming week’s dress-up days as “wigger day.”

► University fraternity members hosting an off-campus party advertised as 

a celebration of Black History Month using African-American stereotypes. 

Participants were encouraged to attend 

in stereotypical garb, and some were 

observed at the party in blackface; 

additionally, a noose and a Ku Klux 

Klan-style hood were displayed at the 

school.

► High school students publicizing “Kick 

a Jew Day” on Facebook and other 

social media, kicking Jewish students 

and making anti-Semitic remarks 

and gestures to them, including Nazi 

salutes. OCR found the bullying in this 

case to be harassment on the basis 

of national origin based on perceived 

ancestry and ethnicity.

OCR has resolved these complaints collaboratively with schools and universities 

to develop and implement innovative initiatives against racial harassment. These 

resolutions are designed to foster school environments in which harassment and 

bullying are not tolerated and where any harassment is promptly and effectively 

addressed. Resolutions often call for annual surveys of the school climate, revision 

of school policies, and better training for staff and students designed to reduce 

harassment and to promote tolerance and respect for other people and cultures. 

In addition, agreements require districts to provide, where appropriate, individual 

remedies for victims, such as counseling and academic support services. OCR 

works with schools to engage the whole school community in addressing problems 

such as harassment to help build a strong, lasting culture of respect and tolerance. 

Resolutions also require the creation of working groups of parents, students and 

school officials to provide on-the-ground feedback to the school on harassment 

issues. OCR also requires measures to allow OCR and the school to assess 

over time whether the school’s efforts are effectively preventing and redressing 

racial harassment. An institution will not be released from monitoring until OCR 

determines this is the case.

For example, in an agreement negotiated with a major state university, the university 

agreed to provide $330,000 in additional annual funding for outreach and retention 

programs, with the goal of recruiting students from historically underrepresented 

“We have been working with the 

department [of Education] for the past 

17 months. . . . They have done a very 

thorough review of . . . our policies 

and procedures and practices and 

enrollments. We have an agreement 

which I think will help to make us better.” 

—Tom Tapper 

Superintendent of Owatonna 

School District 

Star Tribune, April 12, 2011
61

Helping

t

o

Ensure

Equal

Access

t

o

Educati

o

n

groups and providing support and assistance to help retain those students after they 

enroll. In addition, the university agreed to establish a task force to identify best 

practices for the recruitment, support, and retention of faculty from underrepresented 

groups.

Enforcement—Sex Harassment 

OCR’s work with schools and colleges over the last four years has dealt with issues 

that give rise to serious concern about school culture. Some examples: 

► Two separate investigations involved students who were bullied and subjected to 

chronic sexual and gender-based 

harassment at school for not acting 

and dressing in ways that 

conformed to traditional gender 

stereotypes. Students were 

routinely called hostile and 

demeaning names. Female 

students reported being called 

“manly,” “guy,” or “he-she”; male 

students reported being called 

“girl,” and “gay boy.” In one case, 

a middle school student was 

subject to insult and harassment 

for years, including being called 

“sissy” and “girl” and was the target 

of insults meant to question his 

masculinity, including references to his clothing as “girly” and suggestions that he 

“get surgery” to become a female. Students in these investigations were 

physically threatened and assaulted because of their nonconformity to gender 

stereotypes.Some of these students suffered physical and mental health 

problems or stopped attending school for periods of time, left the school district, 

entered into independent study programs, or dropped out of school entirely. One 

student committed suicide after experiencing prolonged harassment.

► In another case, a teacher allegedly bribed a student with candy and money and 

inquired about which students were homosexual, and locked another student in a 

classroom and sexually assaulted him. 

These investigations led to resolution agreements in which the school districts 

agreed to take steps to prevent, eliminate and respond appropriately to sex-based 

harassment and to take certain further actions such as the revision of harassment 

policies, mandatory trainings on harassment, including training on empowering 

bystanders and the community to help stop bullying, hiring of new staff assigned 

to ensure equity and safety, mental health counseling for students who had been 

harassed, implementation of school climate surveys to assess school climate and 

student behavior, the formation of an advisory committee composed of diverse 

members of the school community, and the establishment of a student peer-based 

leadership program. 

“We approach the monitoring role of the 

DOJ and OCR in a spirit of collaboration, as 

it will provide an opportunity for continued 

communication on this important concern. Our 

efforts to further address harassment related 

to sexual orientation will result in positive 

change in our schools that will extend far 

beyond the five years of the consent decree.” 

—Dennis Carlson

Superintendent Anoka-Hennepin 

School District

ABC Newspaper (online), March 5, 2012
62

Office

f

o

r

Civil

Rights

Enforcement—Disability Harassment

OCR’s work with schools and colleges on 

disability harassment has involved issues such 

as the following: 

► A complainant alleged that a high 

school student with Fragile X Syndrome, 

Asperger’s Syndrome, Tourette’s Syndrome 

and ADHD was verbally ridiculed by her 

fellow students about her disability-related 

body odor, sprayed with an air freshener by 

staff in front of her classmates, detained by 

staff in school who made her take showers 

before allowing her to attend classes, and 

pulled out of class to be sent home before 

the end of the school day because of her 

body odor. She wanted to drop out because of the harassment. 

► Parents alleged that their child with cerebral palsy, scoliosis and ADD, who 

weighed only 65 pounds, was bullied and harassed by classmates at middle 

school and on the school bus. They said he was kicked in the legs in the cafeteria, 

intentionally hit in the head while playing dodge ball, and hit with bottles at a pep 

rally. As a result, the parents removed the child from school to homeschool him. 

► A parent complained that a student with a severe nut allergy was the subject of 

a protest instigated by district employees because of aids and services provided 

to the student to address her food allergy. The complainant alleged that several 

teachers, including a teacher who had been reprimanded for failing to implement 

the aids and services, leaked confidential information about the student’s medical 

condition and spread misinformation about the accommodations to other parents, 

and that an online response to a news story concerning the protest included a 

suggestion that parents send their children to school with backpacks smeared in 

peanut oil, which could have proved fatal for her child. 

These complaints led to resolution agreements in which the school districts agreed 

to take steps to prevent, eliminate and respond appropriately to disability-based 

harassment. For example, the school districts agreed to provide training to the staff 

regarding students with disabilities, and Section 504 and Title II; educate students, 

faculty, staff and the community about the severity of nut allergies and the need for 

appropriate aids and services in schools; to provide education or other services to 

the students who were harassed; revise and fully implement policies and procedures 

on bullying and harassment; discipline students who engaged in bullying and 

harassing conduct and report those incidents to parents in a timely manner; and set 

up a hotline for the parent of the bullied student to use to report future concerns.

Technical Assistance 

OCR has also provided extensive technical assistance to school districts, colleges 

and universities across the country on harassment-related issues. In one city, 

Asian-American students suffered pervasive acts of harassment, including an 

“We have embraced these steps, 

and we’re not just wanting to check 

off items from a checklist. We’re 

wanting to grow. We’re doing this all 

for the right reasons.”

—Lisa Gilbert 

Interim Superintendent Tehachepi 

Unified School District

The Bakersfield Californian, 

February 4, 2012
63

Helping

t

o

Ensure

Equal

Access

t

o

Educati

o

n

incident in which approximately 30 Asian-American high school students 

were attacked, leading many to be sent to the emergency room. OCR is now 

working with other federal and local organizations, including DOJ’s Community 

Relations Service, to conduct student workshops at secondary schools in that 

city and others that are experiencing racial or inter-group tensions. In another 

case, where a girl committed suicide following alleged sex and nationalorigin harassment, OCR gave presentations to school district officials on their 

obligations to address illegal harassment.
64

Office

f

o

r

Civil

Rights
65

Helping

t

o

Ensure

Equal

Access

t

o

Educati

o

n

Conclusion

The mission of the Office for Civil Rights is to ensure equal access to education 

and to promote educational excellence throughout the nation through enforcement 

of civil rights. During the last four years, OCR has maintained its proud tradition 

through vigorous execution of its mission while transforming itself to have even 

greater impact. 

As this report shows, for the dedicated OCR team, nearly 600 attorneys, 

investigators and staff in 12 regions across the nation, it has been a time of rising 

to meet challenges, overcoming obstacles and embracing change and innovation. 

Above all, these last four years have been about strategically maximizing OCR’s 

impact, with laser focus on helping to ensure equal access and opportunity in our 

nation’s schools and colleges and improving the lives of America’s students. 

While we have made great progress, there is much more to do. Just as we will 

work hard to vigorously enforce the nation’s civil rights laws, we will continuously 

improve our team. We have work processes that we must make more efficicnet 

and effective, and areas where we need to target our efforts toward greater impact. 

OCR is prepared to meet the challenges ahead. The change of the last four years 

has been systemic and institutional, so it provides the foundation on which the office 

will build. And the processes for strategic planning and development that have 

allowed OCR to work in new ways, meet expanding responsibilities and achieve 

critical goals will set the pattern for work going forward. 
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