U.S. Department of Education

Office for Civil Rights

Fiscal Year 2022 | Annual Report 

Report to

THE PRESIDENT 

and 

SECRETARY OF 

EDUCATION

Under Section 203(b)(1) 

of the Department of Education Organization Act
 2

Report to THE PRESIDENT and SECRETARY OF EDUCATION OFFICE FOR CIVIL RIGHTS | FY 2022

U.S. Department of Education

Office for Civil Rights

Catherine E. Lhamon, Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights

2023

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: “The Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights shall make an annual 

report to the Secretary, the President, and the Congress 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

Report to the President and Secretary of Education Under Section 203(b)(1) of the Department of 

Education Organization Act, FY 2022, Washington, DC, 20202.

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.
 3

 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION | FY 2022

TABLE of CONTENTS

Message from the Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights 4

Executive Summary and Report Highlights 5

The Office for Civil Rights: 

Overview and Trends

6

Increased Outreach, Public Education, and Technical Assistance 10

The Civil Rights Data Collection 12

Title VI: Discrimination Based on Race, Color, 

or National Origin

13

Title IX: Discrimination Based on Sex 20

Section 504 and ADA Title II: Discrimination Based 

on Disability

26

Enforcement Activity Under Other Statutes 39

Looking Ahead 40
 4

Message from the ASSISTANT 

SECRETARY for CIVIL RIGHTS

Fiscal Year 2022 saw an unprecedented surge of civil rights 

complaints to the Office for Civil Rights regarding student 

experiences in America’s schools. I am proud of and grateful to 

OCR’s staff for rising to that challenge, sharing their expertise 

and commitment and drive to deliver significant results for 

school communities, produce policy resources and guidance and 

technical assistance to help school communities fulfill federal 

civil rights guarantees, and support and inspire each other to 

maintain OCR’s consistently high-quality work. 

This report describes those successes, in addition to 

reflecting the variety and persistence of civil rights harms 

students continue to experience as part of their education, 

notwithstanding our national aspirations and guarantees to 

the contrary. Each complaint reflects hope that government will fulfill Congress’ nondiscrimination 

promise, helping to make rights real in the nation’s schools. We in OCR take seriously and work to 

honor that hope, reflecting back our best judgment about when laws we enforce are violated and what 

school communities need to remedy those harms. The work of civil rights includes ensuring that acts 

of injustice become opportunities for change, which is why we partner with schools to find solutions 

that work for all students. 

With my thanks to OCR staff for what we achieved in FY 2022, and my own hope as a parent as well 

as the chief civil rights enforcer in the nation’s schools for the transformation in opportunity that will 

follow from that work, this report offers a snapshot of the status of civil rights in education this fiscal 

year and of our work to support schools in fulfilling the obligations Congress has set for them for 

ensuring equal opportunity for all learners. 

Sincerely,

Catherine E. Lhamon

Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights

Report to THE PRESIDENT and SECRETARY OF EDUCATION OFFICE FOR CIVIL RIGHTS | FY 2022
 5

EXECUTIVE 

SUMMARY 

and REPORT 

HIGHLIGHTS

In FY 2022, OCR confronted the highest volume 

of complaints in our history, receiving 18,804

complaints. While that number exceeded our 

previous record high in FY 2016 of 16,720 

complaints by 12%, we worked to process 

those cases with approximately 18% fewer 

investigative staff than we had had at that 

time. Nonetheless, we kept pace with the high 

volume – resolving the second highest number 

of complaints in our history, at 16,515 cases – 

while simultaneously managing the increasing 

complexity of civil rights concerns in this caseload; 

initiating an unprecedented and targeted 100 

proactive compliance reviews; supporting school 

communities’ civil rights satisfaction through 

publication of seven sets of resources and 

guidance as well as the provision of 186 technical 

assistance presentations; developing revised 

regulations to propose across our jurisdictional 

areas; revising our case processing procedures; 

collecting a new national round of civil rights 

data with historic reporting success; recruiting, 

onboarding, and training 47 additional staff to 

manage our docket effectively; instituting core 

safeguards to ensure high quality of our work 

persists; and responding to 633 inquiries and 

826 FOIA requests for information. These pages 

highlight and reflect the scope and impact of 

our work to safeguard civil rights in the nation’s 

schools during FY 2022 and lay a foundation for 

our efficient, effective, and robust assurance of 

civil rights still to come.

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION | FY 2022
 6

Report to THE PRESIDENT and SECRETARY OF EDUCATION 

OFFICE FOR 

CIVIL RIGHTS: 

OVERVIEW and

TRENDS

MISSION AND SCOPE

OCR’s mission is to ensure equal access to 

education and to promote educational excellence 

across the nation through the vigorous 

enforcement of civil rights laws. OCR safeguards 

the rights of students through the investigation 

of possible violations of civil rights laws, including 

Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VI), 

Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 

(Title IX), Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 

1973 (Section 504), the Age Discrimination Act of 

1975, Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act 

of 1990 (Title II), and the Boy Scouts of America 

Equal Access Act of 2001. In addition, OCR 

safeguards students’ rights by developing policy 

guidance to assist schools and other educational 

institutions receiving Federal financial assistance in 

understanding how OCR interprets and enforces 

Federal civil rights laws, disseminating information 

and technical assistance about students’ rights 

and schools’ responsibilities, and collecting and 

reporting data on key education and civil rights 

issues in our nation’s public schools.

OCR’s mandate to eliminate discriminatory 

barriers in education reaches more than 79 million 

individuals at institutions that receive Federal 

funds, including all state educational agencies; 

approximately 18,100 local educational agencies; 

approximately 6,000 postsecondary institutions, 

including proprietary schools and community 

colleges; 78 state vocational rehabilitation agencies 

and their sub-recipients; and other institutions 

that receive U.S. Department of Education financial 

assistance, such as libraries, museums, and 

correctional institutions.

JURISDICTION

OCR ensures equal access to education for our 

nation’s students by enforcing the following 

Federal civil rights laws and their implementing 

regulations that prohibit discrimination on the 

basis of race, color, national origin, sex, disability, 

and age in all education programs and activities 

that receive financial assistance from the 

Department (see Figure 1):

Figure 1: OCR Enforcement Jurisdiction Timeline

Boy Scouts of America

Equal Access Act (2001) Age Discrimination 

Act of 1975 

Section 504 of the 

Rehabilitation Act of 1973 

Title IX of the Education 

Amendments of 1972 

Title VI of the Civil 

Rights Act of 1964 

Title II of the Americans

with Disabilities Act of 1990 

1960s 1970s 1980s 1990s 2000s

OFFICE FOR CIVIL RIGHTS | FY 2022
 7

Report to THE PRESIDENT and SECRETARY OF EDUCATION 

Figure 2: Map of OCR Regional Offices*

OCR Regional Offices

Puerto 

Rico

U.S. Virgin Islands

HI

WA

OR

ID

MT

NV

CA CO

TX

IL OH

WY

UT

AZ NM

OK

KS

MI

NE

SD

ND

MN

IA

IN

AR

MS AL

TN

KY

WV

LA

WI

MO

GA

PA

VT

NH

ME

VA

NC

SC

FL

NY Boston

NJ

DE

CT

AK

RI

Seattle

CO

Denver

MO

Kansas 

City

Dallas GA

Atlanta

OH

IN

Cleveland

San 

Francisco

nd PA

Philadelphia

Washington, DC

(Metro) 

NY

New York

Northern 

Mariana 

Islands

Guam American Samoa

OCR REGIONAL OFFICE STATE, DISTRICT, OR TERRITORY

Washington, DC (Metro) DC, VA, NC, SC

Atlanta, GA GA, TN, AL, FL

Boston, MA MA, ME, VT, NH, RI, CT

Chicago, IL IL, IN, IA, WI, MN, ND

Cleveland, OH OH, MI

Dallas, TX TX, AR, LA, MS

Denver, CO CO, WY, UT, AZ, NM

Kansas City, MO MO, SD, NE, KS, OK

New York, NY NY, NJ, Puerto Rico, U.S. Virgin Islands

Philadelphia, PA PA, DE, MD, WV, KY

San Francisco, CA CA

Seattle, WA WA, OR, ID, MT, NV, AK, HI, American Samoa, Guam, Northern Mariana Islands

Chicago

• Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964

(prohibiting race, color, and national origin

discrimination);

• Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972

(prohibiting sex discrimination);

• Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1972

(prohibiting disability discrimination);

• Age Discrimination Act of 1975 (prohibiting age

discrimination);

• Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act

of 1990 (prohibiting disability discrimination

in State and local government services – 

regardless of whether programs receive Federal 

financial assistance); and

• Boy Scouts of America Equal Access Act of 2001

(prohibiting public elementary and secondary

schools, local educational agencies, and state

educational agencies from discriminating

against, or denying equal access or a fair

opportunity to meet to, any group officially

affiliated with the Boy Scouts of America, or any

other youth group listed as a patriotic society in

Title 36 of the United States Code).

OFFICE FOR CIVIL RIGHTS | FY 2022
 8

STRUCTURE AND FUNCTIONS 

The Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights, who 

serves at the pleasure of the President of the 

United States and is appointed with the advice 

and consent of the U.S. Senate, leads the Office 

for Civil Rights. During Fiscal Year 2022, the Office 

of the Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights included 

a Deputy Assistant Secretary for Enforcement, a 

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Policy, a Deputy 

Assistant Secretary for Strategic Operations 

and Outreach, a Deputy Assistant Secretary 

for Legal Affairs, a Deputy Assistant Secretary 

for Management and Operations, a Chief of 

Staff, four Senior Counsel, and two Confidential 

Assistants.

OCR serves our nation’s students through a 

headquarters office and 12 regional offices 

located across the country. Our headquarters 

and the DC Metro regional office are located 

in Washington, D.C. The remaining 11 regional 

enforcement offices are in Atlanta, Boston, 

Chicago, Cleveland, Dallas, Denver, Kansas City, 

New York, Philadelphia, San Francisco, and Seattle 

(see Figure 2).

ENFORCEMENT AND STAFFING TRENDS 

FY 2022 saw a massive increase in complaints 

filed with OCR, at 18,804 complaints received, up 

from 8,935 the year before and 9,719 the year 

before that. Typically over the years, the majority 

of the complaints received have raised disability 

concerns. In FY 2022, however, OCR received 

7,339 complaints filed by a single individual, 

raising sex discrimination allegations; this high 

volume altered the ratio of complaint filings 

for this fiscal year. With these data, complaints 

of race, color, or national origin discrimination 

comprised 17% (3,329) of all complaints 

received in the year, down from 24% in FY 2021. 

Complaints involving discrimination based on 

disability comprised 32% (6,467) of all complaints 

this year, down from 48% in FY 2021; sex 

discrimination complaints comprised 48% (9,498) 

up from 17% to FY 2021; and age discrimination 

complaints comprised 3% (666) (the majority of 

which were filed by a single complainant), down 

from 11% in FY 2021. (See Figure 3).

OCR’s overall staffing level has declined 

significantly over the life of the agency, falling 

from nearly 1,100 Full Time Equivalent (FTE) staff

in fiscal year 1981 to 546 FTE staff in fiscal year

2022. This reduction in staffing comes even as 

the volume of complaints received has grown 

significantly, increasing from under 3,000 in fiscal 

year 1981 to 18,804 in fiscal year 2022.

Figure 3: Percentage of Complaints Received by 

Type of Alleged Discrimination (FY 2022)

17%

32%

6,467

3,329

666

9,498

48%

3%

Race & National Origin

Disability

Sex*

Age

Two or 

more races

Asian America

or Alask

White Black or African 

American

Hispanic 

Latino

*7,339 complaints were filed by a single individual

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION | FY 2022
 9

Report to THE PRESIDENT and SECRETARY OF EDUCATION 

FULFILLING FREEDOM OF INFORMATION 

ACT REQUESTS 

OCR processed 826 Freedom of Information Act 

(FOIA) requests in a timely manner, an increase of 

more than 20% over the previous year. 

MAXIMIZING EFFICIENCY AND 

EFFECTIVENESS IN ENFORCEMENT

OCR worked to maximize our efficiency and 

effectiveness in enforcement to meet the high 

caseload demand without sacrificing quality in our 

work. In July 2022, we revised our case processing 

manual to clarify our processes and to add a new 

tool for resolution to help manage our caseload 

and meet complainants’ and recipients’ interest in 

efficient resolution. For the first time, OCR began 

offering mediation as an option complainants 

can request at the time of filing, leaving an option 

for speedy resolution using OCR’s mediation 

expertise where OCR has jurisdiction over a 

complaint and the parties are willing to mediate. 

To ensure ready transition to effective use of this 

new tool, OCR offered repeated training to OCR 

staff in mediation. Early results in this fiscal year 

suggest parties’ willingness to avail themselves 

of this new tool for resolution. In addition to 

these new procedures, OCR has emphasized 

staff training and development during FY 2022, 

to support our staff to resolve cases consistently, 

efficiently, and effectively. 

The revised CPM [Complaint Processing Manual] 

appears to be designed to bolster OCR’s 

complaint investigation and resolution practices, so 

that ED’s broader non-discrimination and student 

access to high-quality learning initiatives can succeed.”

Teri Engler, school attorney at Engler Callaway Baasten 

& Sraga LLC in Oak Brook, Ill, quoted in Special Ed 

Connection on 7/21/22

OFFICE FOR CIVIL RIGHTS | FY 2022
 10

INCREASED 

OUTREACH, 

PUBLIC 

EDUCATION, 

and TECHNICAL 

ASSISTANCE 

OUTREACH AND PUBLIC EDUCATION

During FY 2022, OCR strengthened outreach 

in person, online, and through social media 

to schools, families, and the general public to 

increase awareness of and information about 

the civil rights laws OCR enforces. In addition 

to publishing written resources for school 

communities regarding the laws OCR enforces, 

this fiscal year OCR, in partnership with the ADA 

National Network, produced a 20-part video 

series sharing information about web accessibility 

and addressing technological barriers that can 

interfere with the ability of parents and students 

with disabilities to participate in modern American 

education. OCR designed these videos as tools 

to maximize digital accessibility for students and 

school community members with low vision and 

other disabilities, equalizing access to education 

consistent with the laws we enforce. Related to 

this video series focused on web accessibility, 

OCR provided 59 formal presentations on 

digital accessibility that reached thousands of 

audience members. Recognizing that schools and 

districts rely on private companies to provide 

the technology necessary for many of their 

digital services, OCR has also provided technical 

assistance that helped dozens of companies 

provide more accessible products to the recipient 

community, making it easier for recipients to 

come into compliance with the law. 

OCR processed 633 inquiries from the public and 

members of Congress, a 31% increase over last 

year and a 43% increase over FY 2020. Through 

the Reading Room, OCR provided access to 

information to educational institutions, state and 

local educational agencies, parents, students, and 

members of the general public about complaints 

filed, resolution agreements, correspondence, 

guidance, and more. 

TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE 

Every year, OCR provides technical assistance to 

schools and communities around the country 

on longstanding and emerging civil rights issues. 

Although the COVID-19 pandemic reduced 

opportunities to provide technical assistance 

through in-person workshops and convenings, 

OCR’s regional offices provided 186 technical 

assistance sessions to schools, communities, and 

organizations on various aspects of the civil rights 

laws OCR enforces.

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION | FY 2022
 11

Report to THE PRESIDENT and SECRETARY OF EDUCATION 

POLICY GUIDANCE: AN OVERVIEW

During FY 2022, OCR published seven sets of 

policy guidance and resources addressing a wide 

range of civil rights topics, as summarized in 

Figure 4 below. When appropriate, OCR issues 

guidance jointly with other civil rights offices, such 

as the Civil Rights Division of the United States 

Department of Justice, as reflected in Figure 4 and 

below in this Report.

Figure 4: Policy Guidance Issued in FY 2022

Statute Issue/Release Date Description 

Section 504/Title 

II

Supporting and Protecting the Rights of 

Students at Risk of Self-Harm in the Era 

of COVID-19

October 13, 2021 (released jointly with 

DOJ) 

Provides information about federal legal 

requirements governing school decisions 

about how to respond to students at risk of 

self-harm 

Providing Students with Disabilities Free 

Appropriate Public Education During the 

COVID-19 Pandemic and Addressing the 

Need for Compensatory Services Under 

Section 504

February 16, 2022 

Clarifies the obligation for schools to provide 

compensatory services for students with 

disabilities who did not receive evaluations or 

services to which they were entitled to during 

the pandemic 

Supporting Students with Disabilities 

and Avoiding the Discriminatory Use of 

Student Discipline under Section 504 of 

the Rehabilitation Act of 1973

July 19, 2022 

Explains the nondiscrimination requirements 

that public elementary and secondary schools 

must follow with regard to the discipline of 

students with disabilities under Section 504 

FAQs on the Disability-Related Rights of 

Student Veterans with Disabilities

May 23, 2022 

Describes when veterans with disabilities are 

entitled to academic adjustments and how 

they may request them

20-Part Video Series on Digital 

Accessibility (in partnership with the ADA 

National Network)

May 23, 2022

Covers a variety of topics on digital access 

in education, including how people with 

disabilities use technology, applicable Federal 

regulations, and identifying and remediating 

barriers to access. 

Title IX Supporting Intersex Students 

October 26, 2021

Explains that federal civil rights law protects 

intersex students from sex discrimination

Questions and Answers on the Title IX 

Regulations on Sexual Harassment

June 28, 2022

Clarifies how OCR interprets schools’ existing 

obligations under the 2020 amendments to 

the Department’s Title IX regulations.

OFFICE FOR CIVIL RIGHTS | FY 2022
 12

The CIVIL 

RIGHTS DATA 

COLLECTION

Since 1968, OCR has conducted the Civil Rights 

Data Collection (CRDC), a generally biennial 

survey of the nation’s public schools that gathers 

information about student access to educational 

opportunity from early childhood through grade 

12. Public schools and school districts are required

by statute1 to submit information to this survey to 

assist OCR in evaluating data necessary to ensure 

compliance with civil rights laws within OCR’s 

jurisdiction, prohibiting discrimination based on 

race, color, national origin, sex, age, and disability. 

Over 17,000 school districts and nearly 100,000 

schools self-aggregate and self-report their data. 

The CRDC gathers information about student 

access to educational opportunities and school 

climate factors, such as student discipline and 

sexual harassment and violence. 

ADMINISTRATION OF THE 2020 – 2021 

CRDC

During FY 2022, OCR administered the 2020-

21 CRDC. Public school districts and schools 

submitted their civil rights data to OCR from 

December 13, 2021, through April 8, 2022. For 

the first time since administering the survey to all 

public-school districts and schools, OCR achieved 

a 100% response rate, meaning that all school 

districts submitted data. OCR plans to release the 

public data file and accompanying data reports 

for the 2020–21 CRDC in 2023.

1 20 U.S.C. § 3413(c)(1).

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION | FY 2022
 13

TITLE VI:

Discrimination Based 

on Race, Color, or 

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 ground 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.” Title VI’s protections apply 

to all public elementary and secondary schools 

and to all colleges and universities—public or 

private—that receive Federal financial assistance. 

Its protections extend to all aspects of these 

institutions’ programs and activities. When 

enforcing 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.

Figure 5: Title VI Complaint Allegations Received in FY 2022

Total Number of Complaints Raising Title VI Issues, FY 2022 = 3,329

Note: A single complaint can raise multiple issues; therefore, the total number of issues raised will exceed the number of complaints received. 

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION | FY 2022
 14

Report to THE PRESIDENT and SECRETARY OF EDUCATION 

ENFORCEMENT

In FY 2022, OCR resolved 2,408 Title VI complaints 

that, collectively, address a broad range of Title 

VI-related issues in institutions across the nation

(see Figure 5). These issues range from allegations

of antisemitic harassment to allegations of

discrimination against English Learner students

and their families. The following case resolutions

illustrate OCR’s investigative work over the fiscal

year to enforce Title VI:

Combating Harassment Based on Race, 

Color, or National Origin, including 

Shared Ancestry

Kyrene School District (AZ): In August 2022, 

OCR determined that the district violated 

Title VI by failing to respond appropriately to 

notice of ongoing anti-Semitic harassment of 

a student by numerous classmates, both in 

school and on social media, for over five months.

The harassment included anti-Semitic slurs 

and disparaging remarks about the student’s 

Jewish heritage. The harassment the student 

experienced and the district’s failure to provide 

the student with a safe school environment 

caused the student to suffer significant and 

enduring academic and emotional harm. OCR also 

found that the harassment persisted schoolwide. 

Specifically, despite confirming that the antiSemitic harassment occurred in classrooms and 

elsewhere on campus—including identifying nine 

students who engaged in anti-Semitic harassment 

for several months—the district failed to assess 

whether the verified, widespread harassment 

negatively impacted other students. The district 

also did not take any schoolwide measures to 

address the anti-Semitic harassment until several 

months after confirming its existence, which 

allowed a potential hostile environment to persist 

in the school.

T

To remedy the violation, the district agreed to 

address the student’s academic and counseling 

needs resulting from the harassment, review and 

revise its policies and clarify that its prohibition 

against harassment includes anti-Semitic 

harassment, provide training to district staff, and 

OFFICE FOR CIVIL RIGHTS | FY 2022

he facts in this resolution agreement underscore 

the importance of training teachers and staff 

members to recognize discriminatory harassment 

and to understand their obligations to respond and 

report. A little bit of training can go a long way 

toward equipping teachers and staff members with the 

knowledge they need to meet reporting obligations 

and create a discrimination-free environment for their 

students.”

Dan Fotoples, Director of Content Development, 

TNG Consulting
 15

provide developmentally appropriate education 

to students. Additionally, the agreement 

required the district to develop a climate survey 

to administer in the entire district and to plan 

additional steps based on the results. 

Peoria Unified School District (AZ): In 

September 2022, OCR found that racial 

harassment from student peers and district 

employees created a hostile environment for 

students of color that the district had notice 

of and failed to adequately address. The 

investigation uncovered evidence of harassment 

by fellow students that included race-based slurs; 

mocking police killings of Black people; pulling 

eyes back to taunt Asian students; mimicking 

“Heil Hitler” salutes; drawing Swastikas on 

photographs of students’ faces; and saying that 

Black people “do not deserve to live” and “should 

die,” a student’s skin looked like “burnt” food, 

and another student should “go back to [their] 

country” and “eat dog.” Harassment by employees 

involved repeated touching of and comments 

exclusively about a Black student’s hair. The 

persistent, pervasive, and severe harassment 

and the district’s ineffective response caused 

significant and enduring academic, social, and 

emotional harm to the student who was the 

subject of the OCR complaint. Moreover, though 

the complaint was lodged by a single Black 

student, in its investigation OCR found that a 

schoolwide hostile environment existed because 

at least a dozen other students of color at the 

school were likewise harassed based on race, 

color, or national origin by numerous peers. 

Although administrators and teachers at the 

school were aware of widespread harassment 

based on race, color, or failed to adequately 

investigate whether the harassment created 

a hostile environment for students and failed 

to offer any supports or remedies to students 

who were harassed. OCR found that these 

failures allowed the harassment to continue on 

a consistent basis and to create a schoolwide 

hostile environment. OCR also found that the 

district failed to identify other students who may 

have been subjected to a hostile environment 

but did not report their experiences given the 

school’s repeated failures to respond promptly 

and effectively to reported harassment.

To remedy the violations, the district agreed 

to: provide support and remedies to affected 

students; conduct a climate assessment on the 

prevalence and school’s handling of harassment; 

review and revise policies, forms, and recordkeeping procedures; and train staff in reporting, 

cultural competency, and implicit bias. The 

district also agreed to provide developmentally 

appropriate educational programs for its students 

about how to recognize and report harassment 

based on race, color, and national origin. 

Also...

See San Juan Bautista School of 

Medicine, p. 22 (addressing race and sex 

discrimination, including harassment)

Orland Joint Unified School District (CA): In July 

2022, OCR identified concerns after investigating 

allegations that a school principal required a 

Black student to remove his do-rag and then 

threatened to change the school’s dress code 

to prohibit the wearing of do-rags after the 

student’s mother complained that the principal’s 

action discriminated based on race. Although 

the principal stated that he associated do-rags 

with gang activity, OCR’s investigation indicated 

that the district had no information to suggest a 

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION | FY 2022
 16

Report to THE PRESIDENT and SECRETARY OF EDUCATION 

connection between wearing do-rags and gang 

affiliation. OCR’s investigation also found that the 

principal knew the student was one of very few 

Black students in the school and, therefore, one 

of very few students to whom the policy change 

would specifically apply. 

To resolve the complaint with OCR, the district 

agreed to: communicate in a letter to the 

parent and student the district’s commitment to 

provide an educational environment free from 

discrimination, including retaliation, for all its 

students as well as its commitment to resolving 

incidents implicating race, color, or national origin 

in a manner consistent with its internal complaint 

procedures; designate a school employee to 

serve as a supportive contact for the student; 

issue a statement to parents and guardians at the 

school stating that the district does not tolerate 

discrimination, including retaliation; communicate 

to all students, in an age-appropriate manner, 

the prohibition against discrimination, including 

retaliation, and how to report an incident 

involving discrimination; issue a written guidance 

memorandum to school employees regarding its 

anti-discrimination/anti-retaliation statement on 

the basis of race, color, or national origin, and the 

steps staff should take when they witness or are 

told of discrimination/retaliation; provide training 

for school employees on how to recognize 

conduct that may constitute discrimination, 

including retaliation; and develop a written selfevaluation plan for monitoring the climate at the 

school. 

Combating Discriminatory Discipline

Victor Valley Union High School District (CA): 

In August 2022, OCR found that this district 

violated Title VI by disciplining Black students 

more frequently and more harshly than similarly 

situated white students. OCR identified a pattern 

of disparate disciplinary actions across types of 

discipline (e.g., suspensions, expulsions, truancy, 

law enforcement citations), across schools, and 

across grade levels that imposed greater harms—

including in significant lost learning time—on 

Black students than on their white peers. For 

example, OCR identified instances in which 

Black students received harsher discipline than 

similarly situated white students for cutting class, 

wearing their pants low or “sagging,” engaging in 

a mutual altercation, or making disruptive noises. 

This reported discrimination was consistent with 

statistical evidence of racial disparities in student 

discipline, as well as with district records reflecting 

specific instances of harsher discipline of Black 

students as compared to white students who 

who w

We commend the Office for Civil Rights for its work to hold the Victor Valley Union High School District 

accountable for violating the Civil Rights Act and the rights, dignity, and futures of numerous children 

ere disproportionately targeted and harshly disciplined because they are Black. As we applaud the OCR for 

this essential work, we hope the news of the agreement between the government and the Victor Valley Union High 

School District puts other school districts engaged in discriminatory discipline practices on notice that such conduct is 

unlawful and will not be tolerated.”

 Janai Nelson, President and Director-Counsel, NAACP Legal Defense Fund

OFFICE FOR CIVIL RIGHTS | FY 2022
 17

engaged in similar behavior. OCR’s investigation 

also revealed that some of the district’s discipline 

practices that disproportionately harmed Black 

students departed from district policies and state 

law. Additionally, OCR also found that the district 

failed to maintain and produce timely, complete, 

and accurate records regarding student discipline 

to demonstrate its compliance with Title VI.

To remedy these violations, the district committed 

to: examine the causes of racial disparities in 

the district’s student discipline practices and 

to develop and implement a corresponding 

corrective action plan; establish a stakeholder 

equity committee to inform the district’s 

implementation of the plan and agreement; revise 

its discipline policies and procedures, including 

regarding law enforcement involvement in 

student discipline; ensure accurate and complete 

student discipline record-keeping and reporting; 

regularly analyze student discipline data and 

other information to address possible areas 

of discrimination; clarify prohibited discipline 

practices through a memorandum to appropriate 

staff; provide training for staff on the revised 

discipline policies, practices, and record-keeping; 

conduct student and parent information sessions 

regarding student discipline policies; publicly 

report disaggregated discipline data; conduct 

school climate surveys to assess perceptions of 

fairness and safety in the district; and provide 

compensatory education to students subjected to 

discriminatory discipline policies and practices. 

Ensuring Equal Opportunities for 

English Learners

Pecatonica Area School District (WI): In March 

2022, after investigating whether the district 

discriminated against an eighth-grade student on 

the basis of national origin by not providing her 

with appropriate English Learner (EL) services, 

OCR determined that the district violated Title 

VI by failing to take affirmative steps to address 

the student’s language needs, determine what 

services were appropriate, and track or monitor 

her progress to ensure that she was not left with 

academic deficits. Additionally, the District did not 

have procedures in place to effectively monitor 

the student’s progress. 

To resolve the violations, the district agreed 

to review and revise or develop policies for 

identification and assessment, as well as 

monitoring, of EL students and provide responsive 

training to staff; develop a recordkeeping system 

that identifies and tracks all EL students in the 

district; designate a staff member responsible for 

the assessment and evaluation of the district’s 

EL program; and provide individual relief for the 

student, including by providing the results of her 

language testing to her parent(s), identifying any 

need for academic support, and ascertaining 

the need for and if so providing compensatory 

services to the student. 

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION | FY 2022
 18

Report to THE PRESIDENT and SECRETARY OF EDUCATION 

Shelton SD No. 309 (WA): In investigating a 

complaint alleging that the district discriminated 

against limited English proficient (LEP) parents 

on the basis of national origin, OCR identified 

concerns that the district may not have been 

providing LEP parents with effective access 

to school-related information comparable to 

English-speaking parents during the school’s 

parent-teacher conferences or in attempts 

to raise concerns with the principal. The 

investigation yielded evidence that the district 

also may not have had a consistent process to 

ensure interpreters were qualified to provide 

effective services, or a process to provide school 

staff consistent notice about the variety of 

interpretation services available to parents. 

To remedy the concerns, the district agreed in 

November 2021 to review and revise its policies 

and procedures to ensure that LEP parents and 

guardians are notified of school activities and other 

matters in a language they can understand. The 

district also agreed to notify LEP parents of the 

availability of free language assistance services 

with respect to school programs and activities, 

as well as information on how this assistance 

may be obtained, and provide LEP parents with 

a contact person who can answer any questions 

regarding parental communication and assist 

parents to access interpreter services or translated 

documents. Finally, the district agreed to provide 

training for all school administrators and other 

staff members involved in the provision of 

interpreter and translation services. 

Fulton County Schools (GA): In December 

2021, OCR resolved a complaint alleging that 

the district discriminated against limited English 

proficient (LEP) parents when it failed to provide 

interpretation services during a virtual meeting 

held for parents. OCR’s investigation indicated 

that the district did not provide meaningful 

communication (i.e., interpretation or translation 

of documents) to LEP parents and guardians 

during the virtual meeting. The information 

provided by the district also raised a concern 

about whether the district had a process to 

ensure meaningful communication with LEP 

parents and guardians at meetings organized by 

the district’s central office, or whether the district 

notified LEP parents and guardians, in a language 

the parents and guardians can understand, about 

the availability of language assistance services and 

about the process for requesting such services 

at these meetings. OCR was also concerned that 

the district’s written procedures did not address 

requests for interpretation services that could 

not be submitted five business days before the 

scheduled service date. 

To resolve the complaint, the district agreed 

to develop and submit to OCR for review and 

approval a written plan to provide language 

assistance to LEP parents and guardians that 

ensures they have meaningful access to meetings 

(virtual and in-person) organized by the district’s 

central office; adopt and implement the language 

assistance plan upon OCR’s approval; and train 

the superintendent and central office staff on the 

language assistance plan. 

Leadership Learning Academy (UT): In August 

2022, OCR resolved a complaint alleging the 

academy discriminated against English Learner 

(EL) students based on disability and national 

origin. OCR’s investigation yielded evidence 

that school staff may have required that EL 

students receive three years of English instruction 

before school staff would refer them for special 

education evaluation. Additionally, OCR was 

concerned that staff members who had not been 

trained to provide translation and interpretation 

OFFICE FOR CIVIL RIGHTS | FY 2022
 19

assistance sometimes provided such assistance. 

To resolve this investigation, the academy agreed 

to provide staff training regarding EL students and 

special education services, including training to 

explain that delaying special education referrals 

and evaluations of EL students based on EL 

status is impermissible; provide training for staff 

who provide oral interpretation and/or written 

translation for parents/guardians; and determine 

whether any EL students should be referred for 

special education evaluations. 

Logan City School District (UT): In September 

2022, OCR resolved a complaint alleging the 

district discriminated against English Learner (EL) 

students based on national origin and disability. 

OCR’s investigation yielded evidence of confusion 

among staff about whether EL students had to 

have three years of English instruction before 

being referred for special education evaluation. 

Additionally, OCR noted concerns related to the 

district’s treatment of a particular LEP parent 

and student, including that the district did not 

ensure meaningful communication with the LEP 

parent, did not properly conduct a manifestation 

determination review meeting for the student 

to determine if the student’s behavior was a 

manifestation of disability, and failed to provide 

educational services during the time the student 

was suspended. The resolution agreement 

requires the district to expunge the student’s 

disciplinary record of one incident, develop 

and implement a communication plan with 

the parent, convene an IEP meeting to discuss 

compensatory services for the student, develop 

and implement a district plan for providing 

interpreter services and written translation to 

LEP parents/guardians of students, disseminate 

a memorandum to all administrators, teachers, 

and special education staff regarding the district’s 

obligations under Section 504/Title II, provide 

training to all administrators, teachers and 

special education staff on Section 504/Title II, and 

revise the district’s disciplinary policy and form 

letter notifying parents/guardians of a long-term 

suspension. 

Protecting the Equal Rights of All 

Students to Attend Public School 

Regardless of Immigration or 

Citizenship Status 

Deer Park ISD (TX): In September 2022, OCR 

resolved a complaint alleging the district 

discriminated against students on the basis of 

national origin when it issued letters to parents 

requiring them to provide Social Security cards 

to enroll their children in the district. OCR’s 

investigation revealed concerns that the district’s 

requests for Social Security cards and state-issued 

birth certificates to register new students could 

have barred or deterred non-citizens who did not 

have such documentation from enrolling their 

children in the district’s schools. 

To resolve the complaint, the district agreed to 

revise and disseminate its enrollment policy and 

related addenda, per OCR’s review and approval; 

publish a statement about the revised enrollment 

policy in both English and Spanish, targeted to 

parents and guardians who may have previously 

been discouraged from enrolling their children 

under the district’s prior enrollment policy; 

and provide training on their updated policies, 

practices, and procedures for all staff involved in 

the student enrollment process.

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION | FY 2022
 20

TITLE IX:

Discrimination 

Based on Sex

Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 

(Title IX) 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 education 

program or activity receiving Federal financial 

assistance.” Title IX applies to recipients of 

Federal financial assistance, including colleges, 

universities, and public-school districts. OCR 

enforces Title IX to ensure equal access to 

educational opportunities.

PROPOSED RULEMAKING AND POLICY 

RESOURCES

During FY 2022, OCR issued the following 

proposed rulemaking and resources to support 

full implementation of Title IX, including:

• Proposed Amendments to Title IX Regulations.

In June 2022, the Department proposed

amendments to its regulations implementing

Title IX. The proposed regulations would,

among other things, require schools to take

prompt and effective action to end any sex

discrimination in their education programs or

activities, prevent its recurrence, and remedy

its effects. They would also require schools

to address complaints of sex discrimination

with a fair and reliable process and provide

Figure 6: Title IX Complaint Allegations Received by OCR in FY 2022

Total Number of Complaints Raising Title IX Issues, FY 2022 = 9,498

Note: A single complaint can raise multiple issues; therefore, the total number of issues raised will exceed the number of complaints received. 

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION | FY 2022
 21

Report to THE PRESIDENT and SECRETARY OF EDUCATION 

supportive measures to those affected. Finally, 

they would clarify that Title IX protects against 

discrimination based on sexual orientation, 

gender identity, and sex characteristics, as well 

as pregnancy and pregnancy-related conditions. 

The Department received public comments for 

90 days between June and September 2022, 

and will review and respond to submitted 

comments before issuing a final rule in 2023. 

• In June 2022, OCR issued this update in light

of the Federal district court ruling in Victim

Rights Law Center et al. v. Cardona, No. 1:20-

cv-11104, 2021 WL 3185743 (D. Mass. July

28, 2021), appeals pending (1st Cir), which

vacated the part of the regulation at 34 C.F.R. §

106.45(b)(6)(i) that prohibited a decision-maker

at a postsecondary school from considering

statements not subject to cross-examination.

• Supporting Intersex Students: A Resource for

Students, Families, and Educators. Released in

October 2021, this fact sheet lists key issues

intersex students may face in schools, including

bullying, harassment, or other discrimination

related to their physical characteristics

or because they do not conform to sex

stereotypes. The resource offers suggestions

on ways schools can best support intersex

students, such as using inclusive language

in school mission statements and affirming

students’ rights to be free from all forms of sex

discrimination at school. The fact sheet also

includes steps to take if students believe that

they, or others, have been discriminated against

at school based on sex.

ENFORCEMENT

The following cases illustrate OCR’s Title IX 

resolutions in FY 2022. 

Combating Harassment on the Basis of 

Sex, Including Sex Stereotypes

Hickory City Schools (NC): In April 2022, OCR 

resolved a complaint alleging that the district 

discriminated on the basis of sex at a district 

middle school in its enforcement of the school’s 

dress code. OCR’s investigation indicated that 

the district held assemblies only for girls but 

not boys to discuss hygiene issues and dress 

code enforcement and that a school employee 

commented during one of these assemblies about 

girls needing to “sav[e] leggings for marriage.” The 

evidence also reflected that school staff issued 

warnings during the girls-only assemblies that 

students would be suspended for dress code 

violations, whereas the district dress code stated 

that schools should require compliance with 

the code “with the least amount of disciplinary 

action.” 

To resolve the complaint, the district agreed to 

revise its dress code to include a statement that 

the district will not discriminate on the basis of 

sex in the administration of its dress code and a 

OFFICE FOR CIVIL RIGHTS | FY 2022
 22

statement that students, parents, and staff may 

contact the district’s Title IX Coordinator to file a 

complaint if they believe that the dress code has 

been administered in a discriminatory manner. 

Additionally, the district agreed to provide training 

to staff regarding the revised dress code and the 

school’s responsibilities under Title IX; revise the 

School’s Handbook/Code of Conduct; and monitor 

to ensure that the school is enforcing the dress 

code in a manner that does not discriminate on 

the basis of sex.

Wayne Highlands School District (PA): In July 

2022, OCR resolved a complaint that alleged the 

district discriminated against a male student 

when it prohibited him from wearing an earring 

in school. OCR was concerned that the district’s 

dress code policy relied on sex stereotypes 

that prohibited boys but not girls from wearing 

earrings. To resolve the investigation, the district 

agreed to revise its dress code to comply with 

Title IX; distribute a memorandum to all staff, 

students, parents and guardians in the district 

advising them of the revised dress code policy; 

and issue a formal apology to the student and his 

parent, including a copy of the revised dress code 

policy, and advising the student that he may wear 

an earring to school. 

Eradicating Sexual Harassment and 

Sexual Violence

Chino Valley Unified School District (CA): In 

April 2022, OCR found that the district violated 

Title IX by failing to respond promptly and 

effectively to notice of sexual harassment of 

students on a high school athletic team by 

some of their teammates. OCR’s investigation 

uncovered repeated and pervasive harassment by 

some team members on the team bus, in locker 

and weight rooms, and in the physical education 

classroom. Some team members subjected others 

to harassment that was so serious that it limited 

their ability to access the athletics program. The 

harassing conduct included videotaped assaults 

of teammates, students forcibly physically 

overpowering other students and sharing photos 

of their genitals among the team and on social 

media, and students placing their genitals on 

and near other students’ faces and bodies. 

The response from administrators, including 

coaches, to these incidents was insufficient to 

end the harassing conduct and did not prevent 

its recurrence. Additionally, the district’s response 

following its investigations did not address the 

conduct adequately and failed to consider interim 

supportive measures to protect student athletes 

from sexual harassment. 

To remedy these violations, the district agreed 

to contact all former athletes from the school’s 

fall 2017 team and offer counseling services 

or reimbursement for such services received 

to address the effects of the district’s failure to 

address known sexual harassment on the team; 

conduct a climate survey for the school’s athletics 

team; train district leaders, school administrators, 

and coaches about their responsibilities for 

responding effectively to sexual harassment; 

conduct Title IX education for student athletes; 

and report to OCR on the district’s training and 

responses to complaints of sexual harassment 

through the end of the 2022-2023 school year. 

San Juan Bautista School of Medicine (PR): In 

May 2022, OCR resolved complaints of sex and 

race discrimination in the school’s handling of 

Title IX investigations. OCR determined that the 

school failed ever, over more than four years, to 

investigate a student’s report that another student 

sexually assaulted her. OCR also found that the 

school’s procedures for resolving complaints 

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION | FY 2022
 23

Report to THE PRESIDENT and SECRETARY OF EDUCATION 

of sexual harassment did not comply with Title 

IX. OCR also identified compliance concerns

regarding both the promptness and equity of 

the school’s investigation of allegations of race 

and sex discrimination, including because school 

records reflected that the school did not follow its 

own procedures for investigating discrimination 

complaints and that the school predetermined 

an investigation outcome before contacting the 

complainant to schedule an interview. 

To resolve the complaints, the school agreed to 

conduct the missing sexual assault investigation, 

reimburse the complainant for specified 

coursework, train relevant employees, and update 

its grievance procedures to comply with Title IX. 

Also...

See Peoria Unified School District, p. 15 

(investigation of racial harassment)

Tamalpais Union High School District (CA):

In June 2022, OCR determined that this district 

violated Title IX by failing to respond promptly 

and effectively to repeated notice of ongoing sexbased harassment of a transgender student by 

another student, predicated on sex stereotyping. 

During the investigation, OCR found that the 

district failed to investigate allegations that the 

other student had repeatedly harassed the 

transgender student about her appearance, her 

voice, her body, her name, and her pronouns the 

school year OCR investigated. OCR found that this 

failure to investigate, in addition to the district’s 

failure to respond promptly or effectively to later 

notice of continuing harassment, permitted the 

student to be subjected to a hostile environment 

that was sufficiently serious to deny or limit 

her ability to participate in or benefit from the 

school’s program. 

The resolution agreement committed the 

district to reimburse the student and her family 

for counseling costs incurred because of the 

harassment, review and revise district policies 

and procedures to clarify that harassment 

based on sex includes harassment based on sex 

stereotyping, train school staff and contractors 

on their obligations under Title IX, and document 

to OCR that the district’s responses to complaints 

of sex-based harassment during the most recent 

two school years complied with the resolution 

agreement and with Title IX. 

Eastern Mennonite University (VA): In 

February 2022, OCR resolved an allegation 

that the university discriminated against a 

university faculty member by failing to respond 

appropriately to a report of sexual harassment 

made against him. The evidence reflected that 

although the university found the faculty member 

not responsible for sexual harassment after a 

student in the faculty member’s class alleged he 

engaged in inappropriate and sexually suggestive 

behavior, the university had not answered 

his request for interim measures during the 

investigation, including switching his class and 

office hours to Zoom so that he would not be 

face-to-face with the complaining student, getting 

a third party to audit his grading practices, and 

eliminating the requirement that he be a student 

advisor during the investigation. 

To resolve OCR’s concerns regarding equitable 

treatment for the faculty member, the 

University agreed to conduct a Title IX training 

with an emphasis on interim measures and 

retaliation and to develop a plan to assess the 

OFFICE FOR CIVIL RIGHTS | FY 2022
 24

appropriateness of the university’s response 

to the faculty member including, if necessary, 

consideration of remedial options.

Equal Access to Athletic Opportunities 

and Benefits

Santa Maria Joint Union High School District 

(CA): In February 2022, OCR resolved a complaint 

alleging the school district discriminated on the 

basis of sex in, among other things, the provision 

of locker rooms, scheduling of games and practice 

time, transportation, and per diem allowance 

in the district’s athletic program. During the 

investigation, OCR identified concerns about 

equal opportunity and facilities, including that, 

during two school years, the school’s varsity 

girls’ athletic teams: had fewer regular season 

competition opportunities than its varsity boys’ 

teams; had fewer opportunities for practice and 

travel; and were provided equipment, facilities 

(including locker room), and coaching that were 

not equivalent to what the boys’ teams received. 

To resolve these concerns, the district agreed 

to provide training on the district’s Title IX 

responsibilities to its Title IX coordinator, the 

school’s athletic director, principal, and all 

coaches; take steps to ensure that its girls’ athletic 

teams have equivalent competitive opportunities, 

practice hours, equipment and supplies, and 

opportunities to use school vans for travel; use 

an equivalent ratio of coaches per student for the 

girls and boys athletic teams; ensure that male 

and female student athletes are treated the same 

with respect to fundraising requirements; and 

provide equivalent team rooms and locker rooms 

to girls and boys. 

Western Illinois University (IL): In February 

2022, OCR resolved an investigation that had 

identified concerns that the university did not 

effectively accommodate the interest and abilities 

of female students and did not provide equal 

athletic opportunity based on sex in connection 

with the opportunity to receive coaching and the 

recruitment of student athletes. To resolve the 

complaint, the university agreed to conduct a full 

assessment of how it can equally and effectively 

accommodate the athletic interests and abilities 

of female students to the extent necessary to 

provide equal opportunities for female students 

in its intercollegiate athletic program and to 

accommodate the athletic interests and abilities 

of its female students equally and effectively by 

no later than the 2024-2025 academic year. The 

agreement requires the university to assess the 

opportunity to receive coaching and assignment 

and compensation of coaches for its female 

athletes and create a plan to provide equal 

opportunities in this component by no later than 

the 2023-2024 academic year; to conduct a full 

assessment of its recruitment of student athletes 

and create a plan to provide equal opportunities 

for male and female students in this component 

by the 2022-2023 academic year. 

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION | FY 2022
 25

Report to THE PRESIDENT and SECRETARY OF EDUCATION 

Preventing Discrimination Based on 

Pregnancy or Parental Status 

Bryant & Stratton College, Virginia Beach 

Campus (VA): In January 2022, OCR resolved 

a complaint alleging the college discriminated 

on the basis of pregnancy when it denied the 

complainant’s request to finish her last scheduled 

class early to accommodate her estimated due 

date. While OCR was conducting its investigation, 

the college allowed the complainant to complete 

the program early as initially requested, but OCR 

remained concerned that college staff may not 

have sufficient guidance to respond appropriately 

to a request for a reasonable adjustment due to 

pregnancy status. 

To resolve these concerns, the college agreed 

to adopt policies and procedures that ensure 

students are not unlawfully excluded from the 

college’s educational programs or activities 

based on pregnancy, childbirth, false pregnancy, 

termination of pregnancy, or recovery therefrom, 

including with respect to any student requests 

for reasonable adjustments on these bases. The 

college also agreed to train its employees on 

these policies and procedures. 

Salt Lake Community College (UT): In June 

2022, OCR resolved a student’s complaint of 

pregnancy discrimination after learning in its 

investigation, among other things, that the 

student reported to the college that a professor 

had encouraged her to drop a course due to her 

pregnancy, that college administrators did not 

appropriately address the student’s report, and 

that the college had not provided the student 

with accommodations during her pregnancy. OCR 

determined that the college violated Title IX by 

failing to respond promptly and equitably to the 

student’s complaint of pregnancy discrimination, 

failing to excuse her pregnancy-related 

absences or allow her to submit work following 

those absences, and failing to engage in an 

interactive process to provide her with academic 

adjustments or necessary accommodations 

during her pregnancy. OCR also found that the 

college violated Section 504 by failing to consider 

whether her pregnancy caused a temporary 

disability requiring academic adjustments. 

To remedy these violations, the college agreed 

to revise its nondiscrimination notice and 

grievance procedures to comply with Title IX; 

publish information on its website for pregnant 

students about their Title IX rights and how to 

seek academic adjustments, special services, or 

excused absences; train its Title IX coordinator, 

Disabilities Resource Center staff, and other 

school employees regarding Title IX’s and Section 

504’s protections for pregnant students and 

the academic adjustments and special services 

available to pregnant students; complete and 

document its investigation of the student’s 

complaint of pregnancy discrimination; and take 

other measures to remedy the discrimination 

against the student. 

OFFICE FOR CIVIL RIGHTS | FY 2022
 26

SECTION 504 

and TITLE II: 

DISCRIMINATION 

BASED ON 

DISABILITY

OCR protects the rights of persons with disabilities

under two Federal laws in the education context. 

Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 

prohibits discrimination based on disability in 

any program or activity 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....” Title II of the Americans 

with Disabilities Act of 1990 (Title II) prohibits 

discrimination based on disability by public 

entities, regardless of whether they receive 

Federal financial assistance. It 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.” With regard to educational institutions, 

OCR shares compliance with Title II with the 

Department of Justice. 28 C.F.R. § 35.190(b)(2).

POLICY GUIDANCE AND RESOURCES

During FY 2022, OCR issued five sets of resources 

that describe recipients’ obligations to protect the 

civil rights of students with disabilities, including 

innovating in a new format for the first time to 

provide a 20-part video series breaking down 

elements of fulfilling digital accessibility for 

students and school community members with 

low or no vision, who are deaf or hard of hearing, 

or who have other disabilities that affect their 

digital access. 

• Supporting Students with Disabilities and

Avoiding the Discriminatory Use of Student

Discipline. In July 2022, OCR issued a Dear

Colleague Letter along with a related Fact

Sheet, which describes schools’ responsibilities

under Section 504 to ensure that they do

not discriminate against students based on

disability when imposing student discipline.

The documents summarize public schools’

obligation to provide a free appropriate public

education to K-12 students with disability-based

behaviors; make reasonable modifications to

disciplinary policies for students with disabilities

necessary to avoid disability discrimination; and

administer student discipline requirements in a

nondiscriminatory manner.

This new guidance is worth celebrating. It offers 

concrete strategies for districts and schools . . . .” 

Rachael Goeler, high school special education teacher 

and member of Educators for Excellence’s National 

Teacher Leader Council

• Supporting and Protecting the Rights of Students

at Risk of Self-Harm in the Era of COVID-19. OCR

issued this fact sheet jointly with the Department 

of Justice’s Civil Rights Division in October 2021,

recognizing that the stressors associated with

the COVID-19 pandemic may have caused some

students to experience a mental health disability

for the first time, while for others, an existing 

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION | FY 2022
 27

Report to THE PRESIDENT and SECRETARY OF EDUCATION 

mental health disability may have worsened. The 

fact sheet reiterates that students with mental 

health disabilities are protected by Section 

504 and Title II and that these laws require 

K-12 schools and postsecondary institutions to 

provide students with an equal opportunity to 

learn, free from discrimination, including during 

public health crises. 

• Supporting College Success: FAQs on the

Disability-Related Rights of Student Veterans

with Disabilities. In May 2022, OCR issued this

resource to help students and administrators

in postsecondary institutions understand how

Section 504 covers veterans with disabilities

who apply to or attend college. The FAQ

highlights that the legal standards used to

determine disability status under Section 504

are not the same as the standards used by

the U.S. military and the U.S. Department of

Veteran Affairs, and describes when veterans

with disabilities are entitled to academic

adjustments and how they may request them.

• Also in May 2022, in partnership with the ADA

National Network, OCR released a 20-part

video series covering topics such as applicable

Federal laws, how people with disabilities use

technology, and how to identify and remediate

different types of technological barriers that

can interfere with the ability of parents and

students with disabilities to participate in

modern American education. The intent of the

series is to provide a basic instruction to many

different digital accessibility concepts, such as

fundamental manual testing techniques, use of

color, logical reading order, meaningful video

captions, and others. The videos are designed

for a wide range of audience members,

including school website managers, parents

and students with disabilities, and educational

app developers, and other IT vendors.

• Providing Students with Disabilities Free

Appropriate Public Education During the

COVID-19 Pandemic and Addressing the Need

for Compensatory Services Under Section 504.

Issued in February 2022, this document confirms 

that students with disabilities retain their right

to FAPE during the COVID-19 pandemic and

summarizes elementary and secondary public

schools’ obligations under Section 504 to provide

appropriate evaluations and services to students

with disabilities during the COVID-19 pandemic,

including schools’ responsibility to provide

compensatory services. It goes on to explain

that if a student with a disability did not receive

appropriate evaluations or services, including

the services that the school had previously

determined the student was entitled to, then the

school must convene a group of knowledgeable

persons to make an individualized determination

OFFICE FOR CIVIL RIGHTS | FY 2022
 28

Figure 7: Section 504/Title II Complaint Allegations Received in FY 2022

Total Number of Complaints Raising Disability Issues, FY 2022 = 6,467

Note: A single complaint can raise multiple issues; therefore, the total number of issues raised will exceed the number of complaints received. 

Two or 

more races

Asian American Indian 

or Alaska Native

Academic Adjustments

Accessibility (programs & facilities)

Accessibility (technology)

Admissions

Designation of Responsible Employee

Different Treatment/Exclusion/Denial of Benefits

Disability Harassment

Direct Threat (Title II)

Discipline

Communications (Title II)

Employment

Free Appropriate Public Education

Grievance Procedures

Housing

Modifications of Policies and Procedures (Title II)

Non-Academic Services

Resource Equity & Comparability

Restraint and Seclusion 

Retaliation

Service Animals

Testing

Treatment of Postsecondary Students

Other 

1,028

335

21

27

10

1,856

580

5

239

41

148

3,363

52

30

115

116

22

97

1,708

84

24

102

77

of whether, and to what extent, compensatory 

services are required to remedy any educational 

or other deficits that resulted.

In May 2022, OCR announced our intention 

to propose amendments to the Department’s 

regulations implementing Section 504. OCR set 

up an email address to receive input regarding 

potential amendments to these regulations, in 

addition to listening sessions with interested 

parties, and has incorporated input received so 

far while developing proposed amendments. 

ENFORCEMENT

In FY 2022, OCR resolved 5,187 Section 504/

Title II-related complaints, addressing the 

generally broad range of issues raised with OCR 

in complaints under these laws (see Figure 7). In 

addition, OCR initiated 100 compliance reviews 

focused on web accessibility and based on 

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION | FY 2022
 29

Report to THE PRESIDENT and SECRETARY OF EDUCATION 

concerns about potential violations of disability 

laws. The following cases illustrate OCR’s 

enforcement work related to disability. 

Ensuring Appropriate Educational 

Supports for Students with Disabilities

Los Angeles Unified School District (CA): In April 

2022, OCR resolved a directed investigation of 

whether the district provided the free appropriate 

public education (FAPE) to which federal civil rights 

law entitles students with disabilities during the 

COVID 19 pandemic. OCR’s investigation found 

that during remote learning, the district limited 

the services provided to students with disabilities 

based on considerations other than the students’ 

individual educational needs; failed to accurately or 

sufficiently track services provided to students with 

disabilities; directed service providers to include 

attempts to communicate with students and 

parents—including emails and phone calls—as the 

provision of services, documenting such attempts 

on students’ service records; informed staff that 

the district was not responsible for providing 

compensatory education to students with 

disabilities who did not receive FAPE during COVID19-related school closures because the district was 

not at fault for the closure; and failed to develop 

and implement a plan adequate to remedy the 

instances in which students with disabilities were 

not provided FAPE during remote learning. 

The district agreed to resolve these violations 

by creating and implementing a comprehensive 

plan to address the compensatory education 

needs of students with disabilities due to the 

COVID-19 pandemic. Through implementation of 

the resolution agreement, the district agreed to 

develop and implement a plan to appropriately 

assess and provide compensatory education to 

students with disabilities who did not receive 

FAPE during the COVID-19 pandemic; designate 

a plan administrator to implement the plan for 

assessment of compensatory education; convene 

IEP and Section 504 teams to determine whether 

students were not provided the regular or special 

education and related aids and services designed 

to meet their individual needs during remote 

learning and determine compensatory education; 

track and report to OCR the implementation 

of the plan for compensatory education; and 

conduct outreach to parents, guardians, students, 

and other stakeholders to publicize the plan for 

compensatory education and the roles of the plan 

administrator and independent ombudsperson. 

The National Center for Learning Disabilities 

applauded Los Angeles schools for entering the 

resolution and the federal Education Department 

for sending a signal that it takes its ‘watchdog role’ 

seriously by taking such a large school district to task.” 

Lindsay Kubatzky, Director of Policy and Advocacy, 

National Center for Learning Disabilities

Rapid City Area Schools 51-4 (SD): In December 

2021, OCR resolved an investigation that had 

revealed evidence that the district limited the total 

number of students who could be evaluated for 

learning disabilities, delayed provision of services 

to students who have or are suspected to have 

disabilities while using Response to Intervention 

services, and sometimes served an even smaller 

number of students with disabilities than the 

systemic cap the evidence showed the district had 

placed on students who could receive services, 

even when the district had reason to believe a 

OFFICE FOR CIVIL RIGHTS | FY 2022
 30

larger number of students should be evaluated 

and served. Although the district revised its 

program during the course of the investigation, it 

did not communicate in writing to district staff or 

train staff regarding the claimed discontinuation of 

the cap on the number or percentage of students 

who could receive Response to Intervention 

services and the district did not identify students 

who may have been denied or delayed in 

receiving evaluations or services. To resolve 

the investigation, the district committed to the 

discontinuation of any practice or policy of limiting 

the number of students who could be identified 

or evaluated for learning disabilities; timely 

identification, referral, evaluation, and placement 

at each district school of students suspected of 

having learning disabilities; policy evaluation and 

reporting to OCR regarding revisions; relevant 

training for district employees; and district review 

of student educational records from 2015 through 

2021 to determine whether students should be 

provided compensatory services.

Also...

See Leadership Learning Academy, p. 18 

(imposing language requirements on English 

Learner students with disabilities before 

becoming eligible for special education 

services)

Oakland City University (IN): In August 2022, 

OCR determined that the university failed 

to comply with Section 504 and Title II when 

it prohibited a student from attending inperson instruction without following proper 

procedures to make an individualized threat 

assessment using the best objective evidence 

that the student posed an imminent risk of 

substantial harm that could not be reduced 

or eliminated with mitigating measures. The 

university excluded the student from in-person 

classes because administrators were concerned 

that he might harm others on campus and 

disparage the university’s reputation. During the 

investigation, OCR found no evidence that the 

student attempted to harm or made threats to 

any university personnel or students and found 

that the university made the determination to 

exclude the student prior to meeting with him 

and giving him an opportunity to explain himself. 

The university also did not consider possible 

mitigating measures to address its concerns. The 

evidence indicated that the decision was based on 

disability-based generalizations and stereotypes, 

rather than an individualized assessment, 

including assuming that the student’s statement 

regarding emotional outbursts since leaving the 

military, in light of his anxiety, was an admission 

that he was a threat to the university community.

To remedy the violation, the university entered into 

an agreement that requires it to establish a policy 

and procedures for identifying, evaluating, and 

addressing student threats, potential threats or 

safety concerns; provide training to all individuals 

involved in identifying, evaluating, and addressing 

student threats, potential threats or safety 

concerns; assess the effectiveness of the training 

and provide additional training if the training 

provided was not effective; maintain records of 

all threat assessments including all documents 

relied on in making the threat assessment and 

all mitigating measures considered to reduce or 

eliminate the threat; and reimburse the student for 

the monetary loss of his Veteran Affairs stipend for 

the time in which he was prohibited from attending 

the university in-person. 

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION | FY 2022
 31

Report to THE PRESIDENT and SECRETARY OF EDUCATION 

Triton School District (MA): In June 2022, OCR 

resolved a complaint that alleged the district 

discriminated on the basis of disability. The 

complainant requested that her son be evaluated 

for a Section 504 plan after missing several days 

of school for a diagnosed medical reason. During 

the investigation, OCR identified two compliance 

concerns – first, that instead of evaluating the 

student, the district paused the 504-evaluation 

process in order to attempt supportive measures, 

and second, that the district ultimately convened 

a Section 504 meeting and determined that the 

student was ineligible using a checklist with a 

limited number of potential major life activities 

and no option to add any others. In particular, 

OCR was concerned that teams completing this 

checklist may have been given the mistaken 

impression that they need not consider other 

potential major life activities not already listed. To 

resolve the complaint, the district agreed to revise 

its Section 504 Eligibility Determination Form 

to make clear that the major life activities list is 

non-exhaustive and provide a space to write in 

others; provide training on Section 504 and Title 

II to any staff directly involved in the evaluation 

process, focusing on eligibility standards; reevaluate the student in a team meeting using the 

revised eligibility form; and determine whether 

there are any other students district-wide whose 

evaluations were delayed or who were evaluated 

using the inaccurate checklist, consider whether 

these students are suspected of having a disability 

under correct standards, and if so, conduct a 

team meeting to determine eligibility. 

Pasadena Unified School District (CA): In 

November 2021, OCR determined that the district 

denied a FAPE by failing to provide counseling 

services to students whose IEPs entitled them to 

such services. OCR reviewed data from the 2019-

2020 school year and found that almost 80% of 

district students with IEPs received partial or none 

of the counseling services to which they were 

entitled, and in the 2020-2021 school year almost 

55% of students similarly received partial or none 

of the counseling services to which they were 

entitled. In addition, the district’s data-keeping 

practices and its training for psychologists during 

this time period were both inconsistent. 

To remedy these violations, the district agreed 

to review IEPs for the 2020-2021 school year to 

identify students who were entitled to counseling 

services they did not receive, determine whether 

it would be appropriate to provide compensatory 

counseling services, and if necessary, provide 

those services. Additionally, the district agreed 

to: review IEPs for the 2021-2022 and 2022-

2023 school years to ensure all IEPs providing 

for counseling services are implemented and to 

correct any discrepancies; review its process for 

providing counseling services to special education 

students entitled to such services and create a 

plan to ensure the timely provision of counseling 

services; provide annual training to school 

psychologists both on the district’s obligations to 

OFFICE FOR CIVIL RIGHTS | FY 2022
 32

implement students’ IEPs and on the system used 

to maintain data on its provision of counseling 

services; and issue a guidance memorandum 

to district employees responsible for securing 

counseling services to remind them of the 

district’s obligations and procedures to provide 

these services in full. 

Ensuring Equal Access to Comparable 

Educational Opportunities: Recruitment, 

Admissions, and Enrollment

Colorado Charter Schools: In October 2021, 

OCR resolved 29 complaints against 22 Colorado 

school districts alleging that charter schools 

authorized by the districts discriminated 

against students with disabilities because the 

charter schools requested information about 

the disability status of prospective students as 

part of the application process. The Section 504 

regulations generally prohibit pre-enrollment 

inquiries because they represent unnecessary 

different treatment on the basis of disability. 

OCR worked with each district to discontinue 

the practice of pre-enrollment inquiry and 

verified that requests for disability-related 

information were removed from the charter 

schools’ application materials. OCR also received 

documentation showing that each charter school’s 

application materials were updated to include a 

notice of nondiscrimination. Each school district 

provided information to charter school leaders 

about the rights of students with disabilities in 

charter schools. In the course of resolving these 

complaints, OCR provided technical assistance to 

state officials who were in the process of revising 

state standards for charter schools. The relevant 

state standards now prohibit pre-enrollment 

inquiries for charter school admissions. 

Puerto Rico Department of Education (PR):

In May 2022, OCR resolved a complaint alleging 

that the Puerto Rico Department of Education 

(PRDOE) discriminated on the basis of disability 

by requiring students with disabilities enrolled 

in a multi-grade self-contained special education 

classroom at a PRDOE school to wear orange 

shirts as part of their school uniforms rather than 

the shirt in the color that corresponded to their 

grade levels, like all other children in the school 

wore. During the investigation, OCR found that 

the school’s Facebook page included images of 

uniform shirts in different colors based on grade 

level, assigning the students in the multi-grade 

self-contained special education classroom the 

same color as the pre-kindergarten students, 

while assigning students in other grades shirts 

in various colors. The investigation also reflected 

information that directors of other PRDOE 

schools required students with disabilities to wear 

uniform shirts that are different in color from 

those worn by students without disabilities. 

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION | FY 2022
 33

Report to THE PRESIDENT and SECRETARY OF EDUCATION 

To address the concerns OCR identified, the PRDOE 

agreed to notify all school directors and boards 

that they must not discriminate on the basis of 

disability in their uniform policies; notify school 

staff, parents/guardians, and students that the 

schools will not assign students’ school uniforms 

based on disability and provide information about 

how to file a complaint if needed; and train all 

school directors and boards about their obligations 

under Section 504 and Title II. 

Washoe County School District (NV): In October 

2021, OCR resolved a complaint alleging that a 

school district discriminated based on disability 

by requiring that, in order to enroll in the district’s 

adult education program and earn an adult 

diploma only available through its RISE Academy, 

students with IEPs must first revoke their right to 

special education services. 

To remedy concerns raised by OCR’s investigation, 

the district committed to revise the RISE Academy 

requirements to ensure that students with 

disabilities, including those with IEPs, are not 

excluded; review the records of all current RISE 

Academy students to determine whether any 

received special education services under an 

IEP at another district high school and provide 

written notice to them about the process to 

access disability-related services while enrolled at 

RISE Academy; provide training to RISE Academy 

administrators, school counselors, and teachers 

about their responsibilities to support the 

students’ IEPs and Section 504 plans; and train 

all district high school administrators, school 

counselors, and special education case managers 

about how students with disabilities can access 

RISE Academy to pursue an adult diploma. 

California State University, Monterey Bay (CA):

In June 2022, OCR resolved an investigation after 

finding that the university had provided a student 

with a disability a double bedroom without a 

roommate and with an accompanying bathroom 

as a disability accommodation but that the 

university violated Section 504 and Title II when 

it charged the student a higher rate for a singleoccupancy bedroom. 

To remedy this violation, the university agreed to 

develop a written housing policy to ensure that 

students with disabilities who require private 

housing features as a means of accommodating 

their disability are appropriately accommodated 

and not charged a higher (single) housing rate. 

The university also agreed to provide training to 

relevant university staff and contractors on the 

revised housing policy and reimburse the student 

any amount paid in excess of the cost for a 

double bedroom with a bathroom. 

Ensuring Accessibility of Programs, 

Services, and Facilities 

Northshore School District (WA): In August 

2022, OCR resolved a complaint alleging that the 

district discriminated based on disability by failing 

to communicate effectively with people with 

disabilities during public school board meetings 

that are livestreamed and posted online. OCR’s 

investigation yielded evidence that the district had 

not provided effective real-time captioning to the 

public since March 2021. 

To resolve this complaint, the district agreed to 

revise its policies, procedures, and practices to 

ensure that the district provides effective realtime captions during all school board meetings 

as they are live streamed to the public, including 

captions that effectively identify each speaker 

and convey the content delivered orally. The 

district also agreed to submit a report to OCR that 

OFFICE FOR CIVIL RIGHTS | FY 2022
 34

documents its use of real-time captioning and its 

revised policies, procedures, and practices. 

Jefferson County School District (CO): In 

December 2021, OCR resolved a complaint 

alleging that the district denied students with 

mobility disabilities access to programs and 

activities at an elementary school by failing 

to provide an accessible route connecting the 

school’s main entrance to designated accessible 

parking spaces, a temporary building used for 

classrooms, and a field area used for recess and 

physical education. OCR identified slope concerns 

with two temporary routes that did not comply 

with Section 504 and Title II. 

The resolution agreement requires that the 

district incorporate the necessary accessibility 

requirements into its final plans for school 

expansion and submit the plans to OCR for review 

before implementation. Further, the agreement 

requires that the district develop and immediately 

implement an interim plan that ensures exterior 

routes from the main building to parking spaces, 

recreation fields, and auxiliary buildings are 

accessible to and usable by persons with mobility 

disabilities until permanent construction is 

completed. 

Ensuring Appropriate Educational 

Support for Students with Disabilities

Wake County Public Schools (NC): In September 

2022, OCR resolved an investigation that had 

raised concerns that a student with a disability, 

who played on two sports teams, did not receive 

necessary accommodations to support his 

participation in these extracurricular activities. 

To resolve this investigation, the district held 

a Section 504 meeting to discuss the student’s 

participation in extracurricular sports, conducted 

an individualized inquiry regarding the student’s 

disability-related needs, and offered to provide 

reasonable modifications and services to allow 

the student an equal opportunity to participate in 

extracurricular activities. 

Francis Marion University (SC): In October 

2021, OCR resolved a complaint alleging that the 

university discriminated based on disability by 

not providing an individualized assessment of a 

student’s request for a disability-related testing 

accommodation. OCR’s investigation yielded 

concerns that the university applied a blanket 

prohibition on the specific accommodation the 

student requested rather than engaging in the 

individualized assessment required by Section 

504 and Title II. 

To resolve the complaint, the university agreed 

to develop or revise its policy to ensure that the 

needs of students with disabilities requesting 

academic adjustments are assessed on an 

individual basis, and that the university does not 

maintain a blanket prohibition on adjustments 

to testing conditions as an accommodation. The 

agreement also required that the university issue 

a letter to the student informing her that if she 

chooses to take courses at the university in the 

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION | FY 2022
 35

Report to THE PRESIDENT and SECRETARY OF EDUCATION 

future, the university will reconsider her disability 

accommodation requests on an individualized 

basis. 

Also...

See Salt Lake Community College, p. 25 

(individualized assessment of pregnant 

students for academic adjustment)

Denver Public Schools (CO): In June 2022, 

OCR resolved a complaint alleging the district 

discriminated on the basis of disability because 

the district failed to provide services in a student’s 

IEP for two months. OCR’s investigation revealed 

that the two special education teachers at a 

school resigned around the same time as each 

other, suggesting that other students also may 

not have received needed services. 

To resolve the investigation, the district agreed to 

provide documentation showing that it had hired 

two special education teachers to replace the two 

who had resigned; compile a list of all students 

at the school who did not receive services or 

accommodations to which they were entitled 

under IEPs or Section 504 plans during the 

time the district did not have special education 

teachers in place, as well as compile dates and 

amounts of services and accommodations that 

were not provided for each student; and offer in 

writing to the parent or guardian of each student 

an opportunity to meet to discuss compensatory 

or related services. 

Bloomfield School District (NM): In April 2022, 

OCR resolved a complaint alleging that the school 

district had discriminated against a student based 

on disability when it failed to reevaluate the 

student, implement the student’s IEP, and educate 

the student in the least restrictive environment. 

According to the student’s IEP, his team 

determined that the least restrictive environment 

for him was 27%-81% of his time in general 

education and the remainder in the Bloomfield 

Behavioral Intervention Program (BBI). During 

investigation, OCR found that the student spent 

no time in the general education environment 

and had no access to peers without disabilities. 

Additional evidence OCR gathered suggested 

that the district failed to re-evaluate the student 

before significantly changing his placement in 

BBI to full-time; did not re-evaluate the student 

even after he remained in BBI on a full-time 

basis for multiple years, had failing grades, 

failed to make progress toward his IEP goals, 

and continued engaging in behaviors for which 

he was disciplined in school; failed to provide 

him with a FAPE by not providing the services 

specified in his IEP, including special education 

from a special education teacher, any services in a 

“regular classroom,” and all of his required weekly 

psychological and social work services; and by 

failing to educate him in the least restrictive 

environment or demonstrate that satisfactory 

education could not be achieved in the regular 

environment with the use of supplementary aids 

and services. 

The district entered into a resolution agreement 

with OCR committing to develop and disseminate 

policies and procedures for BBI; train staff about 

policies and procedures approved by OCR; 

convene team meetings for each student in BBI 

to discuss whether the student had been denied 

a FAPE and, if so, create a plan for compensatory 

services or other remedial measures; and report 

to OCR about each student placed in BBI during 

the following school year. 

OFFICE FOR CIVIL RIGHTS | FY 2022
 36

ADDRESSING CIVIL RIGHTS RELATED TO 

RESTRAINT AND SECLUSION

Saco Public Schools (ME): In November 2021, 

OCR resolved a compliance review of the district’s 

use of restraint and seclusion to assess whether 

its use denied students with disabilities a FAPE. 

OCR’s investigation raised several concerns, 

including incidence of restraint and/or seclusion 

as high as 61 times in a single school year 

for a single student, whether students who 

experienced frequent or lengthy restraints and/

or seclusion received a FAPE, the district’s practice 

of sending students home early or requiring them 

to stay home for a few days following certain 

incidents of restraint or seclusion, and inaccurate 

reporting of restraint data to the CRDC. Notably, 

OCR found the district dramatically changed 

its restraint and seclusion practices during the 

course of OCR’s review to focus on de-escalation 

practices and using least restrictive responses 

(such as remaining in the seclusion space with the 

student), resulting in a more than 80% reduction 

in the use of restraint and seclusion in the second 

year OCR reviewed, and an additional 33% decline 

in the third year OCR reviewed. 

To address the concerns OCR identified and build 

on the improvements the district began during 

the course of the review, the district committed 

to assess whether students with disabilities 

who were subjected to restraint or seclusion 

during the three-year period OCR reviewed 

require additional remedies or services, including 

compensatory education; develop or revise its 

policies regarding non-disciplinary behaviorrelated dismissals or stay-home directives to 

ensure students do not unnecessarily lose 

instructional time; assess the appropriate 

involvement of a school resource officer in 

incidents involving student behavior and provide 

school resource officers with specialized training, 

including training on responding to incidents 

involving students with disabilities; comply with 

CRDC obligations to submit correct data; and 

provide training related to restraint and seclusion 

to district staff. 

Huron Valley Schools (MI): In January 2022, OCR 

resolved a compliance review examining whether 

the district’s use of restraint and seclusion denied 

students with disabilities who participated 

in the district’s programs a FAPE. During the 

investigation, OCR identified compliance concerns 

regarding inconsistent recordkeeping and 

whether the district was providing students with 

disabilities subjected to restraint and seclusion 

the opportunity to recoup lost instructional time. 

To resolve the compliance review, the district 

agreed to review its use of restraint and seclusion; 

assess whether students with disabilities who 

were subjected to restraint and seclusion 

required additional remedies or services, 

including compensatory education; and develop 

new systems for documenting the use of restraint 

or seclusion.

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION | FY 2022
 37

Report to THE PRESIDENT and SECRETARY OF EDUCATION 

Horry County Schools (SC): In May 2022, OCR 

resolved a compliance review of the district’s 

use of restraint or seclusion. OCR’s investigation 

yielded concerns that district staff restrained or 

secluded students not for emergency reasons but 

to address behavioral issues such as disrupting 

class, walking out of class, or refusing to follow 

directions, which unnecessarily caused students 

to lose instructional time. Of the seclusion 

and restraint incidents the district recorded 

for the 2017-2018 school year, all involved 

students with disabilities. The evidence showed 

that the district did not conduct necessary 

reevaluations for students who were repeatedly 

restrained or secluded and used generally 

identical standardized language to document 

restraints or seclusion, suggesting that the 

district may not have reviewed the incidents 

in an individualized manner. Additionally, the 

district did not consistently report all incidents 

of restraint or seclusion, incorrectly viewed 

shortening a student’s school day as a permissible 

alternative to restraint or seclusion without 

factoring in that such a change would first require 

an individualized assessment and reported 

inaccurate data to the CRDC. 

The district agreed to change its practices and 

examine and remedy prior instances where 

restraint and seclusion of its students may have 

denied those students a FAPE. Additionally, 

the district agreed to revise its procedures and 

guidance documents on the use of restraint and 

seclusion; clarify the roles and responsibilities 

of those involved in monitoring and oversight 

of the district’s use of restraint or seclusion; 

modify its recordkeeping system; create a plan to 

accurately report data to the CRDC; train staff on 

the district’s procedures and new recordkeeping 

system; review files of currently enrolled students 

who were restrained or secluded since the start 

of the 2017-2018 school year to determine, in 

part, whether any student requires compensatory 

education for educational services missed due to 

incidents of restraint or seclusion; and implement 

a monitoring program to assess the district’s use 

of restraint or seclusion. 

WEB ACCESSIBILITY

Highland Community College (IL): In April 

2022, OCR resolved a complaint that alleged 

technological barriers on the college’s website 

discriminated against individuals with disabilities. 

OCR’s investigation identified concerns such as 

missing captions on videos, no alternative text to 

describe images, and multiple barriers to access 

for people who use screen reader technology, 

among others. 

To resolve the complaint, the college committed 

to adopt an accessibility standard; post a fully 

accessible notice on the college’s website 

describing how people with disabilities can 

inform the college of any technology-based 

barriers to access they have encountered and 

how they can request access to the underlying 

college program, service, or activity; complete an 

OFFICE FOR CIVIL RIGHTS | FY 2022
 38

audit of its website to identify barriers to access 

to its online programs, services, and activities; 

remediate barriers; assess the effectiveness of the

college’s testing protocols and remediation steps 

and make appropriate changes to its testing and 

remediation protocols until, in OCR’s judgment, 

the college’s testing and remediation protocols 

result in equal opportunities for people with 

disabilities; and develop a plan for maintaining 

the accessibility of the services, programs, and 

activities communicated or facilitated online. The 

resolution agreement also includes a checklist 

for testing digital technology to ensure access to 

people with disabilities. 

North Slope Borough School District (AK):

In November 2021, OCR resolved this directed 

investigation after having identified compliance 

concerns regarding inaccessible PDFs, noncaptioned videos, and the inability for some users 

with disabilities to access all the content on the 

district’s website. 

The resolution agreement required the district 

to develop and implement a strategy to ensure 

that individuals with disabilities have an equal 

opportunity to participate in the district’s 

programs and activities offered through its 

website. In addition, OCR and district staff 

delivered several joint informal technical 

assistance presentations on digital access issues 

to the district’s web design vendor. Because 

the vendor works in multiple states, several 

accessibility improvements to its web design 

template that resulted from these presentations 

also will positively impact website accessibility in 

other school districts throughout the country.

RETALIATION

Brookline PS (MA): In February 2022, OCR found, 

after an investigation, that the district’s Special 

Education Parent Advisory Council (SEPAC) 

retaliated against parents who have advocated for 

students with disabilities by amending its bylaws 

to prevent individuals who filed complaints 

against the district from occupying SEPAC Board 

positions. During the investigation, SEPAC revised 

its bylaws to remove the provisions at issue. 

OCR’s resolution agreement required that the 

district send a notice to all families of students in 

the district about the district’s obligation not to 

retaliate, nor to provide significant assistance to 

an entity that retaliates, and specifically informing 

them that the notice is being sent because of an 

OCR complaint. The agreement also required the 

district to offer OCR-approved trainings open to 

all SEPAC-eligible families on these topics. 

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION | FY 2022
 39

Report to THE PRESIDENT and SECRETARY OF EDUCATION 

ENFORCEMENT 

ACTIVITY UNDER 

OTHER STATUTES

OCR also has jurisdiction over two additional civil 

rights laws: the Age Discrimination Act of 1975 

and the Boy Scouts of America Equal Access Act 

(2001).

THE AGE DISCRIMINATION ACT OF 1975

The Age Discrimination Act of 1975 prohibits 

discrimination based on age in programs or 

activities that receive Federal financial assistance. 

This prohibition extends to all state education 

agencies, elementary and secondary school 

systems, colleges and universities, vocational 

schools, proprietary schools, state vocational 

rehabilitation agencies, libraries, and museums 

that receive Federal financial assistance from 

the U.S. Department of Education. Programs or 

activities that receive such funds must provide 

aids, benefits, or services in a nondiscriminatory 

manner. These include, but are not limited to, 

admissions, recruitment, financial aid, academic 

programs, student treatment and services, 

counseling and guidance, discipline, classroom 

assignment, grading, vocational education, 

recreation, physical education, athletics, 

and housing. Though the Act does not limit 

protections against discrimination to a certain age 

group, it does allow for exceptions, such as when 

colleges offer programs that are geared toward 

providing special benefits to children and the 

elderly. 

In FY 2022, OCR resolved 592 complaints under 

the Age Discrimination Act. Common remedies in 

OCR resolutions under this law include provisions 

that require training for staff, updating and 

disseminating nondiscrimination policies, and 

investigation by the institution into the specific 

incidents that resulted in the allegation of age 

discrimination.

THE BOY SCOUTS OF AMERICA EQUAL 

ACCESS ACT

OCR also enforces the Boy Scouts of America 

Equal Access Act. Under this Act, no public 

elementary school, public secondary school, or 

state or local education agency that provides an 

opportunity for one or more outside youth or 

community groups to meet at the school, before 

or after school hours, shall deny equal access or a 

fair opportunity to meet or otherwise discriminate 

against any group officially affiliated with the Boy 

Scouts of America or any other youth group listed 

in Title 36 of the United States Code as a patriotic 

society. In FY 2022, OCR resolved 43 complaints 

under the Boy Scouts of America Equal Access Act.

OFFICE FOR CIVIL RIGHTS | FY 2022
 40

Report to THE PRESIDENT and SECRETARY OF EDUCATION 

LOOKING AHEAD

This report summarizes and encapsulates OCR’s efforts through 

this fiscal year to fulfill our charge to ensure civil rights satisfaction 

among all recipients of federal funds, so no student will experience 

discrimination based on race, color, national origin, sex, or disability, 

or age or in violation of the Boy Scouts of America Equal Access Act. 

OCR looks forward to continuing to meet those challenges for the 

nation’s school communities in the coming years. 

OFFICE FOR CIVIL RIGHTS | FY 2022