U.S. Department of Education 

Offce for Civil Rights 

Annual Report to the

Secretary, the President,

and the Congress 

Fiscal Years 2017-18 
Annual Report to the Secretary, the President, and the Congress

U.S. Department of Education 

Offce for Civil Rights 

Kenneth L. Marcus, Assistant Secretary 

March 2020 

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 Offce 

for Civil Rights and identifying signifcant civil rights or compliance problems as to which such Offce 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, Offce for Civil Rights 

Annual Report to the Secretary, the President, and the Congress 

Under Section 203(b)(1) of the Department of Education Organization Act, FY 2017-18, Washington, DC. 

This report is also available on the Offce for Civil Rights website at http://www.ed.gov/ocr. 

Any updates to this report will be available at this website. 

2 
Table of Contents 

Message from the Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights........................................................................4 

Executive Summary and Report Highlights........................................................................................5 

The Offce for Civil Rights: Overview................................................................................................. 6 

OCR’s Enforcement Efforts: Better Results for More Students.............................................................9 

Regulatory Reform and Reducing the Regulatory Burden................................................................... 11 

Enhancing Transparency..................................................................................................................12 

Title VI: Discrimination Based on Race, Color, or National Origin......................................................... 13 

Title IX: Discrimination Based on Sex................................................................................................17 

Section 504 and Title II: Discrimination Based on Disability................................................................ 20 

The Age Discrimination Act of 1975 and the Boy Scouts of America Equal Access Act of 2001............ 23 

The Civil Rights Data Collection........................................................................................................24 

Looking Ahead................................................................................................................................25 

3 

Office for Civil Rights | Fiscal Years 2017-18
Annual Report to the Secretary, the President, and the Congress

Message from the 

Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights 

It is my pleasure to present the U.S. 

Department of Education’s Offce 

for Civil Rights’ (OCR) Annual Report 

to the Secretary, the President, 

and the Congress for fscal years 

2017-18. This report details OCR’s 

accomplishments, substantive 

achievements, and performance 

results during the frst two fscal 

years of the Trump Administration. 

It has been my privilege to return 

to OCR and serve again with the 

committed and hardworking professionals who enforce the federal civil 

rights laws on behalf of our nation’s students and their families. 

Despite inheriting a backlog of over 7,800 unresolved cases at the 

start of the current administration, OCR has improved productivity and 

effciency while maintaining high-quality standards. During the frst two 

fscal years of this administration, OCR resolved almost double the number 

of complaints per year compared to the previous eight years. In fact, 

OCR resolved on average over 3,200 more complaints than it received 

during these two fscal years. By comparison, the previous administration 

resolved 1,200 fewer complaints than it received per year. 

More signifcantly, OCR has achieved a 60% increase in complaints 

resolved with change, or complaint resolutions involving education 

institutions agreeing to make changes to address a civil rights violation 

or concern. Within this period, in absolute numbers, OCR resolved, on 

average, 647 more complaints with change per year compared to the prior 

eight years. These two fscal years have seen: 

n a 30% increase in Title VI allegations resolved with change, 

n a 60% increase in the number of disability-related allegations 

resolved with change, and 

n an 80% increase in Title IX allegations resolved with change. 

These accomplishments are due in signifcant part to three guiding 

principles that have governed the way this administration has approached 

civil rights enforcement. The frst principle is that civil rights enforcement is 

law enforcement. This means that when a student or family comes to OCR 

with a problem or challenge, OCR’s focus is on the evidence presented 

and the requirements of law. The second principle is that we will enforce 

the laws in full as they were written and passed by Congress, signed by 

the President, and interpreted by the courts, no more and no less. OCR 

will no longer issue sub-regulatory guidance that exceeds or alters the 

terms of federal law. Third, we have rescinded guidance or policies that 

are not in line with the law as passed by Congress. Accordingly, we have 

conducted our activities within statutory requirements. 

In summary, we are strengthening OCR as a more effective, effcient, 

neutral, and impartial law enforcement agency investigating and resolving 

proven violations of our nation’s civil rights laws. 

As U.S. Secretary of Education Betsy DeVos has said, “We must never 

lose sight of our mission: providing each child with the chance to pursue a 

great education in a safe and nurturing environment.” This Annual Report 

to the Secretary, the President, and the Congress details the many ways in 

which OCR strives to meet this mission. 

Respectfully submitted, 

Kenneth L. Macus 

Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights 

“Every child in America deserves to be in a 

safe environment that is free from discrimination.” 

U.S. Secretary of Education Betsy DeVos 

4 
Executive Summary and 

Report Highlights 

During the frst two years of the Trump Administration, the Offce 

for Civil Rights (OCR) fulflled its mission of ensuring equal access 

to education through the effcient and effective investigation and 

resolution of complaints, conducting proactive compliance reviews, 

clarifying obligations under the federal civil rights laws, restoring local 

fexibility through regulatory reform, and administering the Civil Rights 

Data Collection (CRDC). 

In fscal years (FYs) 2017 and 2018, OCR resolved more cases than ever 

before. During this time period, OCR received a total of 25,277 complaints, 

initiated three proactive investigations, and resolved 31,937 cases 

overall, including 61 proactive investigations initiated by the previous 

administration. Most signifcantly, however, during the frst two years of the 

current administration, OCR obtained 3,503 case resolutions that required 

schools to implement substantive changes to address civil rights violations 

and concerns affecting students across the nation. 

The current administration inherited a backlog of 7,800 cases when it 

took offce on January 20, 2017. In the frst two fscal years under this 

administration, OCR received an average of 12,638 complaints per year 

and resolved an average of 15,935 complaints each year. During the 

prior eight fscal years (FYs 2009-16), OCR had received an average of 

9,511 complaints per year and resolved less than that — merely 8,239 

complaints per year. 

OCR resolved, on average, 3,297 more complaints per year than it 

received in FYs 2017-18. In the prior eight fscal years, OCR resolved, on 

average, 1,263 fewer complaints than it received. In FYs 2017-18, OCR 

also saw a dramatic increase in complaint resolutions with change. For the 

two fscal years, OCR averaged 1,722 resolutions with change per year, 

or 649 more resolutions with change per year compared to the average 

number during the prior eight years — a 60% increase over the prior 

administration. 

In FYs 2017-18, OCR saw increases in both resolutions, and resolutions 

with change, over the previous eight years in complaints of discrimination 

in the categories of school discipline, bullying/harassment, and different 

treatment under Title VI; complaints of discrimination in the categories of 

sexual violence and bullying/harassment under Title IX; and complaints 

involving allegations of different treatment/exclusion/denial of benefts and 

issues of website accessibility under Section 504 and Title II. 

OCR also inherited a number of open compliance reviews from the 

previous administration. OCR resolved a total of 61 compliance reviews, 

or 30.5 compliance reviews per year, whereas during the prior eight 

fscal years, OCR resolved only 16.25 compliance reviews per year. OCR 

resolved with change an average of 29.5 compliance reviews per year 

compared to an average of 14 compliance reviews resolved with change 

during the eight years prior. 

During FYs 2017-18, OCR instituted a number of reforms to its Case 

Processing Manual to improve case evaluation, investigation, and 

resolution processes. OCR reimplemented the provision allowing 

complainants to appeal dismissals, clarifed the appropriate use of 

statistical data in investigations, and now requires an examination of 

whether complained about conduct implicates the First Amendment. 

Consistent with OCR’s role as a neutral and impartial law enforcement 

agency, and to reduce regulatory burden on education stakeholders and 

return fexibility to local education leaders where possible, OCR reviewed 

and rescinded a number of sub-regulatory guidance documents that were 

issued under the previous administration. The rescinded sub-regulatory 

guidance concerned sexual harassment, the use of race in admissions, 

school discipline, and transgender issues. 

In an effort to provide much needed clarity in the area of sexual 

harassment in schools and Title IX enforcement, the U.S. Department 

of Education also participated in the formal rulemaking process. On 

November 28, 2018, the Department published for public comment 

a proposed rule that would set forth for the frst time a school’s 

responsibilities in responding to complaints of sexual misconduct. 

OCR also released the 2015-16 school year CRDC. For the frst time, the 

2015-16 CRDC report included comprehensive data relating to incidents 

of criminal offenses in our nation’s public schools. The 2015-16 data 

also included several new categories of data on science, technology, 

engineering, and mathematics, or STEM, courses. 

5 

Office for Civil Rights | Fiscal Years 2017-18
Annual Report to the Secretary, the President, and the Congress

The Offce for Civil Rights:

Overview 

OCR’s Mission 

The mission of the Offce for Civil Rights (OCR) is to ensure equal access 

to education and to promote educational excellence throughout the nation 

through vigorous enforcement of the federal civil rights laws. 

The laws OCR enforces protect millions of students attending or seeking 

to attend our nation’s education institutions from unlawful discrimination. 

OCR’s work to eliminate discriminatory barriers to education directly 

supports the U.S. Department of Education’s mission to promote student 

achievement and preparation for global competitiveness by fostering 

educational excellence and ensuring equal access. 

OCR safeguards the rights of students primarily through the investigation 

of complaints alleging violations of one or more of the federal civil rights 

laws.1 In addition to resolving the large volume of complaints, OCR initiates 

compliance reviews and takes other proactive steps to identify and focus 

on specifc compliance problems that are particularly acute or national in 

scope. Such proactive measures include collecting data on key education 

and civil rights issues in our nation’s public schools and offering technical 

assistance to schools and other education institutions receiving federal 

fnancial assistance so that they can better understand how OCR interprets 

and enforces federal civil rights laws. 

Jurisdiction 

OCR ensures equal access to education for our nation’s students by 

enforcing six federal civil rights laws that prohibit discrimination based on 

race, color, national origin, sex, disability, and age. These are: 

n Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000d et seq., 

implementing regulation at 34 C.F.R. Part 100 (prohibiting race, 

color, and national origin discrimination); 

n Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, 20 U.S.C. § 1681 et 

seq., implementing regulation at 34 C.F.R. Part 106 (prohibiting sex 

discrimination); 

n Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, 29 U.S.C. § 794, 

implementing regulation at 34 C.F.R. Part 104 (prohibiting disability 

discrimination); 

n Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, 42 U.S.C. 

§ 12131 et seq., implementing regulation at 28 C.F.R. Part 35

(prohibiting disability discrimination by public entities, regardless of

whether or not they receive federal fnancial assistance);

n the Age Discrimination Act of 1975, 42 U.S.C. § 6101 et seq., and 

its implementing regulation at 34 C.F.R. Part 100 (prohibiting age 

discrimination); and 

n the Boy Scouts of America Equal Access Act of 2001, 20 U.S.C. § 

7905, implementing regulation at 34 C.F.R. Part 108 (prohibiting 

public elementary and secondary schools, local education agencies, 

and state education agencies from denying equal access or a fair 

opportunity to meet, or discriminating against, any group offcially 

affliated with the Boy Scouts of America or any other youth group 

listed as a patriotic society in Title 36 of the U.S. Code). 

These civil rights laws represent a national commitment to end 

discrimination in education programs and activities receiving federal 

fnancial assistance. Since most education institutions receive some 

type of federal fnancial assistance, these laws apply throughout the 

nation and protect millions of students attending or seeking to attend our 

nation’s elementary, secondary, and postsecondary institutions. In certain 

situations, the laws also protect persons who are employed or seeking 

employment at education institutions from unlawful discrimination. 

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

6 
 

Figure 2: Map of OCR Regional Offces 

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 

MA 

VT 

NH 

ME 

VA 

NC 

SC 

FL 

NY Boston 

NJ 

DE 

CT 

AK 

RI 

Seattle 

Denver Kansas 

City 

Dallas 

Atlanta 

Chicago Cleveland 

San 

Francisco 

Philadelphia 

Washington, DC 

(Metro) 

New York 

Guam 

Northern 

Mariana 

Islands 

American Samoa 

OCR REGIONAL OFFICE STATE, DISTRICT, OR TERRITORY 

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

Atlanta, GA GA, AL, FL, TN 

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

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

Cleveland, OH OH, MI 

Dallas, TX TX, LA, MS 

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

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

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

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

San Francisco, CA CA 

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

Structure and Functions 

OCR is composed of a headquarters offce located in Washington, 

D.C., and 12 enforcement offces representing 12 regions located in

the U.S. and its jurisdictions. The headquarters offce provides overall

leadership, policy development, and coordination of enforcement

activities. The majority of OCR’s activities are conducted by the 12

enforcement offces, which are responsible for investigating and resolving

complaints of discrimination, conducting compliance reviews, monitoring

corrective action agreements, and providing technical assistance. The

12 enforcement offces comprise the majority of OCR’s staff and are

located in Washington, D.C., Atlanta, Boston, Chicago, Cleveland, Dallas, 

Denver, Kansas City, New York, Philadelphia, San Francisco, and Seattle 

(see Figure 2). OCR is led by the Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights, who 

is nominated and, with the advice and consent of the Senate, appointed 

by the President of the United States. OCR leadership also includes a 

Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary, a Deputy Assistant Secretary for 

Enforcement, a Deputy Assistant Secretary for Policy and Development, 

and a Deputy Assistant Secretary for Management and Planning. 

7 

Office for Civil Rights | Fiscal Years 2017-18
Annual Report to the Secretary, the President, and the Congress

Figure XX. OCR Issues Received by Jurisdiction 

FYs 2017-2018 

Section 504/Title II 

Title IX 

Title VI 

Other 

Age Discrimination Act 

Boy Scouts of America Equal Access Act 

52, 0.1% 

20,105

50%

8,598

21%

7,637

19%

2,602

6%

1,519

4%

52, 0.1%

OCR’s Caseload 

By law, OCR must “make a prompt investigation whenever a compliance 

review, report, complaint, or any other information indicates a possible 

failure to comply” with the laws protecting students from discrimination. 

Anyone can fle a complaint to alert OCR to potential discrimination, not 

just the person discriminated against. As a result, processing the large 

volume of complaints fled with OCR each year comprises the majority of 

OCR’s enforcement activity. 

FYs 2017-18 saw a continued increase in the number of complaints 

received. During these two fscal years combined, OCR received a total 

of 25,277 complaints, or an average of 12,638 complaints per year. This 

number is double the number of complaints received ten years earlier, 

during FY 2008. The 25,277 complaints received contained 40,513 

allegations.2 Allegations involving discrimination on the basis of disability 

comprised 50% (20,105) of total allegations raised in complaints during 

the two years. Allegations of discrimination based on sex comprised 

21% of total allegations raised (8,598), and allegations of discrimination 

based on race, color, or national origin comprised 19% of total allegations 

(7,637). Allegations of discrimination based on age comprised only 4% 

(1,519) of total allegations raised in complaints received during 

FYs 2017-18.3 

Figure 3: OCR Issues Received by Jurisdictional Statute 

for FYs 2017-18 

8 
9 

Offce for Civil Rights | Fiscal Years 2017-18 

OCR’s Enforcement Efforts: 

Better Results for More 

Students 

Overview 

OCR primarily carries out its enforcement responsibilities by investigating 

and resolving individual complaints fled with the Department. Anyone who 

believes that there has been a violation of the civil rights laws enforced 

by OCR may fle a complaint with one of OCR’s 12 regional enforcement 

offces. In resolving complaints, OCR’s primary objective is to promptly and 

thoroughly investigate the allegations of discrimination, determine whether 

OCR’s civil rights laws have been violated, and, if so, provide timely and 

effective remedies for the violations. 

Over the last ten years, the number of complaints OCR receives annually 

continues to steadily increase. For example, as Figure 4 demonstrates, 

in fscal year 2009, OCR received only 6,369 complaints compared 

to 12,435 complaints in fscal year 2018. Additionally, as Figure 4 

also demonstrates, OCR has seen a dramatic increase in individual 

complainants fling a very large number of identical or nearly identical 

complaints against a large number of recipients (“multi-fler” complaints). 

These increases are refected in several areas, including complaints 

related to website accessibility, the inappropriate use of restraint and 

seclusion, and sexual harassment and sexual violence. 

The statistics discussed below demonstrate OCR’s ongoing effort to 

improve both the quality and timeliness of the case resolutions4

 obtained

on behalf of the nation’s students and families. The data cannot on its 

own, however, fully capture the positive impact that OCR’s work has 

on education institutions and students nationwide. As a result of OCR’s 

enforcement efforts during FYs 2017-18, thousands more students 

can now attend school with less fear, more fully participate in programs 

because they are provided with the necessary aids and services, enjoy an 

equal opportunity to participate in athletic programs, submit allegations 

of discrimination that will receive prompt and meaningful consideration 

and, if merited, result in remedies, and be considered for classes, sports, 

and activities on an equal footing with students who were previously 

afforded better opportunities merely because of their race, sex, or lack of a 

disability. Specifc examples of OCR’s investigations, compliance reviews, 

and remedies are provided in the case summaries throughout 

this document. 

Figure 4: OCR Complaints Received in FYs 2009-18 

18,000 

16,000 

14,000 

12,000 

10,000 

8,000 

6,000 

4,000 

2,000 

0 

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 

Complaints Received (Multiple)* 3 0 651 241 2,535 2,052 1,682 6,204 1,568 1,715 

Complaints Received (Single) 6,366 6,936 7,189 7,593 7,421 7,940 8,715 10,560 11,274 10,720 

*Multiple complaints received from single individual 
10

Annual Report to the Secretary, the President, and the Congress

Improvements in Complaint Processing: Changes 

to the Case Processing Manual

OCR continually evaluates its case processing system to ensure that the 

rights of students and families are fully protected and that the agency is 

positioned to vigorously enforce federal civil rights laws in a manner that is 

both timely and impactful.

On March 5, 2018, OCR issued a revised Case Processing Manual 

(CPM). The CPM describes OCR’s procedures relevant to evaluating and 

investigating complaints as well as the actions OCR takes if it finds that a 

recipient has violated the civil rights laws or to effect voluntary compliance. 

The March 2018 CPM replaced the now-archived February 2015 CPM. 

Among other things, the March 2018 CPM included the following:

n revisions clarifying that investigation and resolution activities will be 

n expanded timeframes for the negotiation of resolution agreements 

with recipients,

n additional bases for mandatory dismissal of allegations, and

n a provision requiring that OCR provide a copy of the complaint to 

the recipient upon request.

OCR also inherited a number of open compliance reviews from the 

previous administration. During FYs 2017-18, OCR resolved a total of 61 

compliance reviews — or 30.50 compliance reviews per year — whereas 

during the prior eight fiscal years, OCR resolved only 16.25 compliance 

reviews on average each year. Again, significantly, OCR resolved with 

change an average of 29.5 compliance reviews per year compared to 

an average of 14 compliance reviews resolved with change during the 

previous eight years.

In terms of efficiency, during FYs 2017-18, OCR resolved on average 

3,297 more complaints per year than it received in FYs 2017-18. In the 

prior eight fiscal years, OCR resolved, on average, 1,263 fewer complaint 

resolutions than it received. However, OCR also obtained more meaningful 

complaint resolutions than in the prior eight years. In FYs 2017-18, OCR 

saw a dramatic increase in complaint resolutions requiring recipients to 

make a substantive change to protect students’ rights (resolutions with 

change). In FYs 2017-18, OCR averaged 1,722 resolutions with change 

per year, or 649 more resolutions with change per year compared to the 

average number during the prior eight years. This is over a 60% increase 

in resolutions with change over the previous administration.

On January 20, 2017, the current administration inherited over 7,800 

unresolved, or “pending,” civil rights complaints from the previous 

administration. During FYs 2017-18, OCR received 25,277 additional 

complaints. Over 9,000 of the total complaints were filed by a select 

few complainants who each filed complaints in the thousands. During 

the first two years of the current administration, OCR has worked hard 

to not only keep up with the number of cases coming in but to work 

away at the backlog it inherited. In the first two fiscal years of the current 

administration, OCR has received an average of 12,638 complaints per 

year and has resolved an average of 15,935 complaints each year.6

During the prior eight fiscal years (FYs 2009-16), OCR received an 

average of 9,511 complaints per year and resolved even fewer complaints 

per year — only 8,239 complaints.

As a result of these changes to the CPM, a focus on reorienting OCR to 

the role of a neutral and impartial law enforcement agency, and efforts to 

clarify recipients’ obligations under the federal civil rights laws, OCR has 

secured better results for the students and families facing discrimination 

in our nation’s schools.5

 The statistics for the first two fiscal years of 

the current administration — as compared to those for the preceding 

eight fiscal years — demonstrate the Trump Administration’s heightened 

commitment to vigorously enforce our nation’s civil rights laws.

Compliance Reviews Inherited and Resolved

Better Results Figure 5: 

OCR Complaints Resolved With Change in FYs 2009-18

Figure XX. OCR Complaints Resolved “With Change”*

FYs 2009-2018

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

1800

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018

823

*Resolutions where schools agree to take corrective action to protect a student’s civil rights

1,010 1,096 1,201 1,294 1,007 1,031 1,111 1,750 1,694
Offce for Civil Rights | Fiscal Years 2017-18 

Regulatory Reform and

Reducing the Regulatory

Burden 

Overly burdensome regulations adversely affect the ability of the nation’s 

education institutions to prepare students for the opportunities and 

challenges of the 21st century. Regulations and regulatory guidance 

— an agency’s statement on policy or interpretation of its statutes or 

regulations through letters, memoranda, bulletins, circulars, or manuals — 

signifcantly impact the public and demand the additional time, attention, 

and response by those required to comply with those laws. 

On January 30, 2017, President Donald Trump issued Executive Order 

13771, “Reducing Regulation and Controlling Regulatory Costs,” which 

established a federal strategy “to alleviate unnecessary regulatory 

burdens” on the American people. Pursuant to this regulatory reform 

agenda, the Department engaged in substantial efforts in FYs 2017-18 

to simplify its own agency regulations and rescind burdensome subregulatory guidance.7

 By the end of FY 2018, OCR had identifed and 

rescinded 16 sub-regulatory guidance documents. 

Among these were a series of so-called “Dear Colleague” letters previously 

issued by OCR. These letters told stakeholders how OCR would interpret 

and enforce its statutes and implementing regulations and directed 

stakeholders on how to comply with federal civil rights laws in education, 

including those in the areas of sexual harassment and sexual violence 

under Title IX and student disciplinary practices under Title VI. These letters 

often expanded upon or subtracted from the express requirements under 

the Title IX and Title VI statutes, rather than merely providing clarity. In 

this way, these informal guidance documents not only imposed signifcant 

and unfounded regulatory burdens on education entities but also raised 

signifcant legal issues. In response to public input, the Department lifted 

the regulatory burden caused by many of these “Dear Colleague” letters. 

These letters and accompanying documents were withdrawn because they 

advanced policy preferences and positions not required or contemplated 

by federal law or the Constitution, prematurely decided the legality of 

particular actions, and directed schools to take action beyond plain 

legal requirements. 

2018 the Department determined that the issue of sexual harassment 

and violence in schools needed to be addressed. OCR’s prior guidance on 

sexual harassment and violence was inconsistent with case law under Title 

IX and failed to account for predictability and reliability in administrative 

enforcement. As a result, the Department published a Notice of Proposed 

Rulemaking in the Federal Register to clarify a school’s obligations under 

Title IX in addressing sexual misconduct in schools. The proposed rule 

seeks to defne sexual harassment, set forth reporting obligations, and 

establish procedures schools must employ to guarantee safety, provide 

support, and ensure fundamental fairness for all students at the education 

institution. For more information, see the section following on Title IX. 

For those times that this administration seeks to make or reform legal 

policy, this administration is committed to using the formal noticeand-comment rulemaking procedures mandated by Congress in the 

Administrative Procedures Act. This formal process provides full ventilation 

of the issues, maximizes input from education stakeholders and the 

general public, and results in binding legal authority. Toward this end, in 

11 
12 

Annual Report to the Secretary, the President, and the Congress

Enhancing Transparency 

During this reporting period, OCR has elevated its commitment to 

transparency by improving the way it disseminates information to the 

public, supports the recipient education institutions subject to OCR’s 

enforcement authority, and responds to Freedom of Information Act 

(FOIA) requests. 

Open Investigations on the OCR Website 

To keep students, teachers, and communities informed, OCR, for the 

frst time, published on the OCR website a list of elementary, secondary, 

and postsecondary institutions where OCR is investigating allegations of 

discrimination.The database, “Pending Cases Currently Under Investigation 

at Elementary-Secondary and Postsecondary Schools,” went live in 

January 2018.8 This repository provides a snapshot of OCR’s enforcement 

activity as of the last Friday of each month. 

The inclusion of an institution in this database does not mean that the 

institution violated a federal anti-discrimination statute; rather, it means 

that a complaint was fled with OCR and the agency determined that the 

allegations in the complaint should be investigated or that OCR itself has 

opened a compliance review. Cases included in the database are therefore 

cases OCR is investigating or working to resolve through a negotiated 

agreement. A number of cases are ultimately resolved with a fnding that 

there is insuffcient evidence that an institution violated a statute 

enforced by OCR. 

The search results are organized by the types of discrimination issues 

under investigation and not the number of open investigations at an 

institution. For example, an institution may appear in the search results 

multiple times if OCR is investigating the institution for more than one 

type of alleged discrimination, even if the allegations stem from a single 

complaint. Similarly, an institution may appear only once in the search 

results if OCR is investigating it for only one type of alleged discrimination, 

even if there are multiple open cases. 

By adding this searchable and interactive feature to the website, OCR for 

the frst time provided public access to the full range of OCR’s pending 

investigations. This information was often requested by the general 

public. Making it readily available refects this administration’s greater 

commitment to transparency. 

Providing Notice to Recipients 

OCR has also endeavored to conduct its investigations of alleged civil 

rights violations with an eye towards increasing transparency between 

OCR and the parties involved. In 2018, OCR revised its CPM to include a 

provision requiring OCR staff to provide the recipient with a copy of the 

complaint fled against them. Before these changes to the CPM, OCR only 

provided the recipient with a copy of OCR’s CPM and a notifcation letter 

providing the following: 

n OCR’s jurisdiction over the matter, 

n the allegations to be investigated, 

n a statement that OCR is a neutral factfnder, 

n information about OCR-sponsored mediation, known as Facilitated 

Resolution Between the Parties Process and 

n the OCR staff person who would serve as the complaint’s and 

recipients primary contact during the investigation and resolution of 

the complaint. 

By providing a copy of the original complaint to the recipient at the outset 

of an investigation, OCR ensures that they will have full notice of the 

nature and scope of OCR’s inquiry, thereby providing the recipient the 

ability to fully know the nature of the allegations against them and an 

opportunity to adequately respond. 

Freedom of Information Act 

The volume of FOIA requests that OCR received has increased 42% since 

FY 2015 from 1,116 requests in that year to 1,583 requests in FY 2018. 

In FYs 2017-18 combined, OCR received 3,086 FOIA requests, issued 

2,970 responses, and expended over $3 million per year on average 

in personnel costs to process these requests, up from $1.7 million in 

personnel costs in FY 15. The increase in requests and processing has 

been met by current OCR staff. Many of the FOIA requests that OCR 

receives are complex in nature, and it is not unusual for OCR to receive 

FOIA requests for entire enforcement case fles, which may contain 

thousands of records to be reviewed, processed, and released under 

applicable FOIA standards. OCR anticipates that this heavy volume of FOIA 

requests will continue through the coming fscal years and will be adding 

a dedicated FOIA team in FY 2020 to meet this statutory mandate for 

transparency in government. 
13 

Different Treatment/Denial of Beneÿts 

Racial Harassment 

Retaliation 

Discipline 

Employment Discrimination 

Academic Evaluation/Grading 

Admissions and Recruitment 

Limited English Proÿciency — Parental Communication 

Financial Assistance/Scholarships 

English Learners Services 

Resource Equity and Comparability 

Graduation/Degree/Diploma Requirements 

Extracurricular Activities 

National Origin Involving Religion 

Access to Advanced Courses Including Gifted and Talented 

Testing 

Special Education for English Language Learners 

Afÿrmative Action (Including 5 Employment) 

Limited English Proÿciency — Testing 

Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math (STEM) 

Other 

1,491 

1,517 

1,487 

1,502 

44

628 

523 

2 

423 

219 

203 

174 

167 

107 

80 

101 

93 

84 

74 

54 

36 

47 

37 

41 

42 

39 

41 

33 

26 

17 

12 

13 

16 

13 

12 

9 

6 

5 

5 

292 

217 

2,533 

2,539 

0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 

Resolved Received 

Title VI: Discrimination 

Based on Race, Color, or 

National Origin 

Overview 

Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VI) prohibits discrimination 

based on 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 benefts of, or be subjected to discrimination 

under any program or activity receiving Federal fnancial assistance.” 

Title VI protections apply to all public and secondary schools as well as 

all colleges and universities — both public and private — that receive 

federal fnancial assistance. Its protections extend to all the education 

institution’s programs and activities. OCR works to ensure equal access to 

all of an institution’s education services and benefts and to prevent acts 

of retaliation against those who report Title VI violations. Cases that OCR 

staff investigate and resolve under Title VI include those involving different 

treatment in dispensing of school discipline, discriminatory assignment 

to special education services, bullying and harassment based on race 

or national origin, and discriminatory access to resources, curricula, and 

opportunities that foster college and career readiness. 

Key Facts 

In FYs 2017-18, OCR received 5,583 complaints alleging a total of 7,637 

violations of Title VI. A total of 7,830 allegations of violations of Title VI 

were resolved in 5,714 complaints. Of these, 369 Title VI allegations 

were resolved with change. The largest numbers of these allegations 

involved claims of different treatment based on race, racial harassment, or 

retaliation against individuals who asserted their Title VI rights or those of 

others. See Figure 6 for more specifc information on the variety of Title VI 

allegations received and resolved by OCR during FYs 2017-18. OCR also 

resolved 32 compliance reviews involving a total of 64 Title VI issues, 60 

of which were resolved with change. Many of these compliance reviews 

resulted in remedies that provided minority students with greater access 

to advanced courses and provided students who are English learners (EL) 

with improved services. 

Regulatory Reform 

Pursuant to President Trump’s regulatory reform agenda, OCR reviewed 

several of the previously issued guidance documents related to Title VI 

issues. After a careful review, OCR rescinded six guidance documents 

related to school discipline and seven guidance documents related to the 

voluntary use of race in admissions. OCR then issued the “Questions and 

Answers on Racial Discrimination and School Discipline” (December 21, 

2018) and reinstated fve guidance documents that were issued between 

2003 and 2008 on the use of race in admissions to clarify education 

institutions’ obligations under Title VI as written in statute and interpreted 

by the Supreme Court. 

Figure 6: Title VI Issues Received and Resolved in FYs 2017-18 

Office for Civil Rights | Fiscal Years 2017-1188
Annual Report to the Secretary, the President, and the Congress

100 

80 

60 

40 

20 

0 

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 

17 13 27 41 24 37 36 29 30 44 

40 

30 

20 

10 

0 

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 

22 22 30 25 25 13 4 8 6 30 

100 

80 

60 

40 

20 

0 

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 

41 45 59 65 60 56 42 31 42 81 

Increases in Resolutions with Change in Key Title 

VI Issue Categories 

In FYs 2017-18, OCR saw signifcant increases in both resolutions, and 

resolutions with change, over the previous eight years in several Title VI 

issue areas, including school discipline, bullying/harassment, and 

different treatment. 

Resolutions of complaints involving allegations of discrimination in 

school discipline were up 12% in FYs 2017-18. During these years, 

OCR averaged 293 resolutions of discipline-related complaints per year 

compared to an average of 261 per year during the prior eight years. 

There was also an increase in resolutions with change in the category 

of school discipline. In FY 2018, OCR resolved 30 discipline complaints 

with change – the most in any year since 2011. In the frst two fscal 

years under the current administration, OCR averaged 18 resolutions with 

change per year in school discipline cases compared to a yearly average 

of 18 resolutions with change during the prior eight years. 

Figure 7: Title VI Discipline Complaints Resolved With Change 

in FYs 2009-18 

Figure 9: Title VI Different Treatment Complaints 

Resolved With Change in FYs 2009-18 

Bullying/harassment complaint resolutions were up 48% on average 

during the past two years compared to the previous eight, from 475 

complaints to 704, and resolutions with change increased 25%, from 49 

complaints to 61.5 complaints on average per year. 

Finally, complaint resolutions based on different treatment nearly doubled 

on average from 857 complaints on average to 1,209, and resolutions 

with change of these complaints increased 32%, an average of 28 

complaints resolved with change per year during the last eight years to 37. 

The complaints and compliance reviews summarized below are a 

small but representative sampling of the types of Title VI investigations 

conducted by OCR and the remedies that were obtained as a result of the 

investigations. The remedies imposed were deemed appropriate for the 

facts of the specifc case. 

Figure 8: Title VI Bullying/Harassment Complaints 

Resolved With Change in FYs 2009-18 

14 
 

Policy Review: 

Nondiscrimination and School Safety 

Following the tragic school shooting in Parkland, Florida, President 

Trump established the Federal Commission on School Safety 

(Commission) to review school climate and safety issues and to 

make meaningful and actionable recommendations regarding best 

practices to keep students safe. After months of research, school 

visits around the nation, and receiving testimony from experts 

and concerned citizens, on December 18, 2018, the Commission 

released a 177-page report that detailed 93 best practices and 

policy recommendations for improving safety at schools across the 

country. As part of those policy recommendations, the Commission 

recommended that the U.S. Departments of Justice and Education 

rescind the joint January 8, 2014, “Dear Colleague Letter on 

Nondiscriminatory Administration of School Discipline” and related 

statements of sub-regulatory guidance and policy. They did so on 

December 21, 2018. 

These documents were withdrawn because they advanced policy 

preferences and positions not required or contemplated by Titles IV 

or VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The robust protections against 

race, color, and national origin discrimination guaranteed by the 

Constitution, Title IV, and Title VI remain unchanged, however, and 

continue to be vital for students and education institutions. Thus, 

on December 21, 2018, OCR issued “Questions and Answers on 

Racial Discrimination and School Discipline” to ensure that the public 

continues to have information about how OCR assesses a school’s 

compliance with Title VI with respect to the administration of school 

discipline and how a school may self-evaluate its compliance with 

Title VI with or without OCR’s involvement. 

The six specifc documents that were withdrawn were as follows: 

n “Dear Colleague Letter on Nondiscriminatory Administration 

of School Discipline;” 

n “Overview of the Supportive School Discipline Initiative;” 

n “Guiding Principles: A Resource Guide for Improving School 

Climate and Discipline;” 

n “Appendix 1: U.S. Department of Education Directory of 

Federal School Climate and Discipline Resources;” 

n “Appendix 2: Compendium of School Discipline Laws and 

Regulations for the 50 States, Washington D.C., and Puerto 

Rico;” and 

n “School Discipline Guidance Package FAQs.” 

The two documents that were issued on December 21, 2018, were 

as follows: 

n “Dear Colleague Letter with Updates to U.S. Departments of 

Education and Justice Guidance on Title VI” (withdrawing six 

2014 school discipline guidance package documents) (pdf); 

and 

n “OCR Questions and Answers on Racial Discrimination and 

School Discipline” (pdf). 

Case Summaries 

Addressing Double Standards in Discipline 

A complaint alleged an elementary school had a practice of disciplining 

Native American students more harshly than similarly situated white 

students. The same complaint also alleged that the school subjected 

Native American students to a racially hostile environment when a former 

principal hit several Native American students with a clipboard, grabbed at 

least one Native American student’s arm, and used derogatory statements 

when referring to such students. In the course of its investigation, OCR 

discovered evidence indicating that Native American students were more 

frequently and harshly treated than similarly situated white students 

and that former and current staff did engage in unwelcome physical 

behaviors and make derogatory statements to Native American students. 

The school district entered into a resolution agreement with OCR under 

which it committed to revise its discipline policies, provide appropriate 

interventions and supports for at-risk students, establish a procedure for 

an independent consultant to address complaints of harassment made 

against any superintendent or principal, and train staff on preventing and 

responding to racial harassment, among other provisions. 

Combatting Harassment on the Basis of National Origin 

OCR resolved a compliance review of a school district related to 

harassment of students based on their actual or perceived ancestry or 

ethnic characteristics. OCR’s compliance review was prompted by reports 

of the district’s inconsistent, inadequate, and untimely responses to 24 

reported incidents of harassment of Sikh or Middle Eastern students 

and the administrative staff and faculty’s apparent lack of knowledge 

with respect to the district’s harassment complaint procedures. Prior to 

completing the investigation, OCR informed the district of its compliance 

concerns, and the district agreed to a resolution agreement under which 

it would issue and widely publicize a statement that the district does not 

tolerate acts of harassment based on race, color, or national origin; provide 

information on reporting; and arrange for the provision of appropriate 

harassment training for administrative staff, faculty, and students. Under 

the agreement, the district would also provide a forum for conversations 

with district students to improve cultural awareness and discuss potential 

concerns related to harassment; establish a working group of district 

personnel, community representatives, parents, and students to make 

recommendations regarding the effectiveness of the district’s harassmentprevention efforts; and conduct a climate survey to assess the education 

environment for district students. 

Protecting the Right to Report 

A complaint alleged that a district’s termination of the complainant’s 

employment constituted retaliation for the complainant raising concerns 

that students were being subjected to discrimination and harassment 

on the basis of race and national origin. OCR opened an investigation 

into the complainant’s allegation of retaliation, and OCR and the school 

district subsequently signed a resolution agreement. Pursuant to this 

agreement, the district agreed to appoint a neutral third party to evaluate 

the underlying racial discrimination concerns reported to the school by 

the complainant, direct school staff to take certain corrective actions to 

remedy its treatment of the complainant, and provide training to school 

administrators and staff on the Title VI prohibition on retaliation. 

15 

Office for Civil Rights | Fiscal Years 2017-18
Annual Report to the Secretary, the President, and the Congress

Ensuring Equal Educational Opportunity for 

English Learner Students 

OCR resolved its compliance review examining whether a school district 

was providing equal educational opportunities to minority students who 

are ELs. The same compliance review also examined whether the district’s 

communications with limited English profcient (LEP) parents provided 

them with meaningful access to information the district generally provides 

to parents. As a result of the compliance review, OCR discovered evidence 

indicating that the district failed to consistently provide translation or 

interpretation of vital documents and other information to LEP parents and 

failed to have an adequate process for evaluating its Alternative Language 

Program (ALP), among other defciencies in the district’s identifcation and 

assessment of EL students, staffng, and/or staff development; monitoring 

of students in the ALP; and ensuring access to special programs and 

activities for EL students. The district signed a resolution agreement 

under which it would be required to identify and assess every EL student 

within the district, including students from small language groups; provide 

EL services and instruction to all EL students in all education settings, 

including special education and extracurricular activities; ensure that each 

EL student received alternative language services until the student no 

longer requires those services; provide LEP parents with adequate notice, 

in their own language, of the placements of each of their EL students and 

all other notices that it generally provides to other parents; and ensure 

that all EL students have an equal opportunity to participate in gifted and 

talented, advanced placement, and other specialized programs. 

Policy Review: 

Voluntary Use of Race in Admissions 

On July 3, 2018, the U.S. Departments of Education and Justice 

withdrew certain joint guidance documents regarding the use of race 

by elementary, secondary, and postsecondary schools. As stated in 

the withdrawal letter, those documents were withdrawn because 

they advocated policy preferences beyond the requirements of the 

Constitution and federal law, prematurely decided the legality of 

particular actions, and suggested that schools take action beyond plain 

legal requirements. OCR also reinstated its earlier guidance on the 

use of race and stated that it will continue to investigate complaints 

regarding the use of race, consistent with the criteria established by 

the U.S. Supreme Court. 

The seven specifc documents that were withdrawn were as follows: 

n December 2, 2011, “Dear Colleague Letter Regarding the Use 

of Race by Educational Institutions;” 

n December 2, 2011, “Guidance on the Voluntary Use of Race to 

Achieve Diversity in Postsecondary Education;” 

n December 2, 2011, “Guidance on the Voluntary Use of Race to 

Achieve Diversity and Avoid Racial Isolation in Elementary and 

Secondary Schools;” 

n September 27, 2013, “Dear Colleague Letter on the Voluntary 

Use of Race to Achieve Diversity in Higher Education After 

Fisher v. University of Texas at Austin” [Fisher I]; 

n September 27, 2013, “Questions and Answers About Fisher v. 

University of Texas at Austin” [Fisher I]; 

n May 6, 2014, “Dear Colleague Letter on the Supreme Court 

Ruling in Schuette v. Coalition to Defend Affrmative Action;” 

and 

n September 30, 2016, “Questions and Answers About Fisher v. 

University of Texas at Austin” [Fisher II]. 

In addition to the 2018 withdrawal letter listed below, OCR also 

reinstated fve documents on the use of race that were issued between 

2003 and 2008, which are listed below: 

n July 3, 2018, “Updates to U.S. Departments of Education and 

Justice Guidance on Title VI” (withdrawing seven use-of-race 

guidance documents) (pdf); 

n August 28, 2008, “Dear Colleague Letter on the Use of Race 

in Assigning Students to Elementary and Secondary Schools” 

(pdf); 

n August 28, 2008, “Dear Colleague Letter on the Use of Race in 

Postsecondary Student Admissions” (pdf); 

n February 2004 “OCR Letter: Race-Neutral Approaches to 

Diversity” (html); 

n February 2004 “OCR Report: Achieving Diversity: Race-Neutral 

Alternatives in American Education” (html); and 

n March 2003 “OCR Report: Race-Neutral Alternatives in 

Postsecondary Education: Innovative Approaches to Diversity” 

(html). 

16 
Athletics 

Sexual/Gender Harassment and Violence 

Different Treatment/Denial of Beneÿts 

Retaliation 

Grievance Procedures 

Employment 

Admissions 

Discipline 

Designation of Responsible Employee 

Grading 

Financial Assistance/Scholarships 

Dissemination of Policy 

Pregnancy/Parenting 

Housing 

Access to Courses, Gifted and Talented, and Single-Sex Courses 

Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math (STEM) 

Other 

10,622 

3,596 

1,822 

1,745 

1,025 

1,011 

895 

926 

327 

314 

277 

262 

138 

112 

123 

116 

62 

47 

53 

54 

48 

20 

37 

116 

27 

23 

15 

11 

14 

14 

3 

4 

175 

220 

0 1000 2000 3000 4000 10000 12000 

Resolved Received 

 

Title IX: Discrimination 

Based on Sex 

Overview 

Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 (Title IX) prohibits 

discrimination on the basis of sex in education programs and activities 

that receive federal funds. Title IX states: “No person in the United States 

shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the 

benefts of, or be subjected to discrimination under any education program 

or activity receiving Federal fnancial assistance.” 

Title IX applies to recipients of federal fnancial assistance, including 

colleges, universities, and public school districts. OCR enforces Title IX to 

ensure that all students have equal access to educational opportunities 

and can go to school without fear of sex discrimination. Cases that OCR 

staff investigate and resolve under Title IX include those involving sexual 

harassment, different treatment in athletic opportunities, bullying and 

harassment based on sex, and retaliation for fling a complaint. 

Key Facts 

In FYs 2017-18, OCR received 7,138 complaints alleging a total of 8,598 

violations of Title IX. A total of 15,662 allegations of violations of Title IX 

were resolved in 13,234 complaints. Of these, 673 Title IX allegations 

were resolved with change. The largest numbers of these allegations 

involved discrimination in athletic programs. See Figure 10 for more 

specifc information on the variety of Title IX allegations received and 

resolved by OCR during FYs 2017-18. OCR also resolved 23 compliance 

reviews involving a total of 73 Title IX issues, 51 of which were resolved 

with change. Many of these compliance reviews resulted in remedies that 

required institutions to respond to reports of sexual harassment more 

promptly and effectively or to provide more equity for females in athletics 

programs, for example, by building or substantially upgrading a 

softball feld. 

Regulatory Reform 

Pursuant to President Trump’s regulatory reform agenda, OCR reviewed 

several of the previously issued guidance documents related to Title IX 

issues. After a careful review, OCR rescinded two guidance documents 

related to sexual violence, and the Department announced its intent to 

engage in formal rulemaking to clarify a recipient’s obligations under Title 

IX with respect to claims of sexual misconduct. The Department issued 

a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to initiate the notice-and-comment 

process soon after. OCR also, together with the Department of Justice, 

rescinded one joint guidance document related to transgender students. 

Figure 10: Title IX Issues Received and Resolved in FYs 2017-18 

17 

Office for Civil Rights | Fiscal Years 2017-18
Annual Report to the Secretary, the President, and the Congress

90 

80 

70 

60 

50 

40 

30 

20 

10 

0 

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 

5 8 9 14 17 8 11 5 14 86 

120 

100 

80 

60 

40 

20 

0 

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 

35 36 50 74 63 33 36 40 60 106 

 

Increases in Resolutions with Change in Key Title 

IX Issue Categories 

During FYs 2017-18, OCR saw signifcant increases from the previous 

eight years in both resolutions and resolutions with change in the 

Title IX–complaint issue categories of sexual violence and bullying/ 

harassment. Resolutions of allegations of sexual violence increased over 

500% from 47 per year on average during the prior eight years to 264 

per year for FYs 2017-18. Resolutions with change for sexual violence 

complaints also increased 500% from the previous eight years, from 10 

to 50 per year on average. Resolutions of complaints alleging bullying/ 

harassment based on sex doubled during the past two years compared 

to the previous eight, from 294 to 598.5 per year on average, and 

resolutions with change for these complaints increased 80% from 46 

complaints to 83 per year on average. 

Figure 11: Title IX Sexual Violence Complaints 

Resolved With Change in FYs 2009-18 

Figure 12: Title IX Bullying/Harassment Complaints 

Resolved With Change in FYs 2009-18 

The complaints and compliance reviews summarized below are a 

small but representative sampling of the types of Title IX investigations 

conducted by OCR and the remedies that were obtained as a result of the 

investigations. The remedies imposed were deemed appropriate for the 

facts of the specifc case. 

Case Summaries 

Ensuring Equal Facilities for Female Athletes 

A complaint alleged that a county school system discriminated against 

female athletes by failing to provide female athletes with locker rooms 

and softball facilities equivalent to those provided to male athletes. After 

the conclusion of the investigation, the county school system agreed to 

remedy the violation by providing equivalent facilities to the women’s 

softball teams. In addition, the county school system agreed to provide 

equivalent scoreboards, press boxes and public address systems, outfeld 

depth, backstops, bullpens, feld maintenance and preparation, 

and concessions. 

Securing Equal Access to STEM Courses for Male Students 

A complaint alleged that a college discriminated against male students 

on the basis of sex when it offered a single-sex section of science, 

engineering, and math courses to female students only, resulting in fewer 

seats available for male students overall. OCR’s investigation revealed 

that a male student was waitlisted to a co-educational section while there 

were remained open seats in the female-only sections of the same course 

in violation of Title IX. To remedy the violation, the college agreed to an 

agreement with OCR under which it would discontinue single-sex sections 

of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) courses, 

publicize the availability of the courses to all students, and distribute a 

notice that its Women in STEM program and all related activities are open 

to students of both sexes. 

Remedying Different Treatment for Female Students 

A complaint alleged that a high school had discriminated against female 

students on the basis of sex by denying them equal access to educational 

programs at the school. In the course of its investigation, OCR discovered 

evidence that the school placed attendance restrictions on females for 

certain classes but not male students, provided female students with less 

access to computers, removed female students from education settings 

during disruptions and delays but not male students, and transported 

female students, but not male students, by groups rather than by grade 

level. Pursuant to a resolution agreement, the school district agreed to 

provide compensatory services to female students enrolled during the 

relevant time period, make changes in practices to ensure that male and 

female students were not treated differently based on sex, and provide 

training to all staff members and administrators at the school regarding 

the district’s obligations to prevent and address sex-based discrimination. 

Responding to Allegations of Sexual Harassment and 

Violence 

A complaint alleged that a school failed to promptly and equitably respond 

to allegations of sexual harassment of female high school athletes by 

their coach, despite having received prior notice of other allegations 

of harassment against the same individual. OCR’s investigation found 

that the school’s only response was to speak to only one student and 

18 
the coach, although several instances of sexual harassment had been 

reported. Additionally, the investigation revealed that the school failed to 

satisfy various procedural requirements under Title IX, such as failing to 

have a designated Title IX coordinator, failing to adequately disseminate 

a policy against sex discrimination, and failing to publish its Title IX 

grievance procedures. As part of its resolution agreement, the school 

agreed to develop and publicize Title IX grievance procedures and a policy 

of nondiscrimination, train staff on topics related to sex discrimination and 

sexual harassment, and offer counseling to all students who played for the 

coach in question, among other provisions. 

Another complaint alleged a school failed to take appropriate action after 

receiving notice that a male student had sexually assaulted the female 

complainant at the school and, without her consent, recorded the assault 

and disseminated the recording to other students. OCR found that the 

school had not conducted the investigation according to appropriate 

Title IX procedures, failed to notify the parties of the outcome of the 

investigation, did not determine whether dissemination of the video 

created a hostile environment, and failed to provide adequate notice of 

and contact information for the Title IX coordinator. As part of its resolution 

agreement, the district agreed to revise its grievance procedures and 

policy of nondiscrimination, develop and provide training for its Title IX 

coordinator and other appropriate staff, and, to the extent needed, provide 

the complainant with counseling, academic, and therapy services, among 

other provisions. 

Policy Review: 

Transgender Guidance Withdrawn 

On February 22, 2017, the Departments of Education and Justice 

withdrew their joint “Dear Colleague Letter on Transgender Students,” 

stating that the previous guidance gave rise to several legal questions 

and that there must be due regard for the primary role of the states 

and local school districts in establishing education policy. OCR 

continues to investigate complaints of discrimination against all 

students, including transgender and gender-nonconforming students, 

consistent with OCR’s jurisdiction under Title IX of the Education 

Amendments of 1972 and the other civil rights laws that it enforces. 

n February 22, 2017, “Dear Colleague Letter Withdrawing 

Previous Guidance on Transgender Students” (withdrawing 

May 13, 2016, “Dear Colleague Letter on Transgender 

Students”) (pdf) 

Policy Review: Seeking to Protect Students 

and Restore Fundamental Fairness 

On September 7, 2017, U.S. Secretary of Education Betsy DeVos 

announced the Department’s intention of engaging in notice-andcomment rulemaking and to “seek public feedback and combine 

institutional knowledge, professional expertise, and the experiences 

of students to replace the current approach with a workable, 

effective, and fair system.”9 On September 22, 2017, OCR 

withdrew its “Dear Colleague Letter on Sexual Violence” (2011) and 

“Questions and Answers on Title IX and Sexual Violence” (2014). 

OCR also announced its intent to engage in rulemaking on Title IX 

responsibilities arising from complaints of sexual misconduct and, in 

the interim, released a “Questions and Answers on Campus Sexual 

Misconduct,” set forth below: 

n September 22, 2017 “Questions and Answers on Campus 

Sexual Misconduct” (withdrawing the April 4, 2011, “Dear 

Colleague Letter on Sexual Violence” and April 29, 2014, 

“Questions and Answers on Title IX and Sexual Violence”) 

(pdf) 

The Department issued a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on Title 

IX on November 29, 2018. Among other things, the proposed rule 

seeks to protect students and restore fundamental fairness by 

defning sexual harassment under Title IX and what it means for a 

student to report it, requiring schools to respond meaningfully to 

every report of sexual harassment and ensuring that due process 

protections are in place for all students. In addition, the proposed 

rule seeks to ensure that all schools clearly understand their legal 

obligations under Title IX and that all students clearly understand 

their options and rights. OCR has received over 100,000 comments 

in response to the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking. The fnal Rule 

will include an effective date of implementation. 

n November 29, 2018, “Notice of Proposed Rulemaking” (html) 

19 

Office for Civil Rights | Fiscal Years 2017-18
Annual Report to the Secretary, the President, and the Congress

Free and Appropriate Public Education 

Different Treatment/Exclusion/Denial of Beneÿts 

Retaliation 

Accessibility (Technology) 

Academic Adjustments/Auxiliary Aids 

Disability Harassment 

Discipline 

Accessibility (Programs and Facilities) 

Effective Communication (Title II) 

Treatment of Postsecondary Students 

Employment 

Housing 

Restraint and Seclusion 

Non-Academic Services 

Service Animals 

Grievance Procedures 

Admissions 

Modiÿcations of Policies and Procedures (Title II) 

Testing 

Resource Equity and Comparability 

Designation of Responsible Employee 

Direct Threat (Title II) 

Location and Notiÿcation 

Other 

3,027 

3,050 

906 

2,976 

2,

534 

533 

449 3 489 

327 

223 

267 

249 

245 

237 

213 

227 

208 

180 

193 

259 

177 

185 

147 

137 

106 

105 

69 

61 

59 

56 

56 

40 

32 

22 

30 

29 

12 

11 

741 

641 

1,559 

1,658 

1,625 

1,491 

1,578 

2,015 

5,808 

5,955 

0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 

Resolved Received 

 

Section 504 and Title II: 

Discrimination Based on 

Disability 

Overview 

OCR protects the rights of persons with disabilities, including students and 

parents, pursuant to its jurisdiction under two federal laws. 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 qualifed 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 benefts of, or be subjected to discrimination 

under any program or activity receiving Federal fnancial assistance....” 

Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA) prohibits 

discrimination on the basis of disability by public entities, regardless of 

whether they receive federal fnancial assistance. Title II states: “[N]o 

qualifed individual with a disability shall, by reason of such disability, be 

excluded from participation in or be denied the benefts of the services, 

programs, or activities of a public entity, or be subjected to discrimination 

by any such entity.” 

Figure 13: Section 504/Title II Issues Received and Resolved in FYs 2017-18 

20 
700 

600 

500 

400 

300 

200 

100 

0 

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 

0 1 2 0 6 3 15 154 598 381 

30 

25 

20 

15 

10 

5 

0 

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 

0 3 4 5 6 18 6 8 26 17 

300 

250 

200 

150 

100 

50 

0 

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 

67 87 85 137 124 105 136 142 236 189 

OCR handles cases of disability discrimination involving a range of issues, 

including the failure to provide a free and appropriate public education 

(FAPE), inaccessible facilities or technology, the denial of academic 

adjustments or auxiliary aids and services for postsecondary students, 

different treatment based on an individual’s disability, and disability 

harassment. 

Key Facts 

In FYs 2017-18, OCR received 13,343 complaints alleging a total of 

20,105 violations of Section 504/Title II. A total of 20,779 allegations of 

violations of Section 504/Title II were resolved in 13,866 complaints. Of 

these, 4,051 Section 504/Title II allegations were resolved with change. 

The largest numbers of these allegations concerned whether a school or 

other education entity failed to provide a student with a disability with a 

FAPE, treated students with disabilities differently from other students, 

retaliated against individuals who asserted their Section 504/Title II rights 

or those of others, or failed to timely provide academic adjustments 

for students with disabilities, for example, a reduction of course load 

requirements or assistive technology. See Figure 13 for more specifc 

information on the variety of Section 504/Title II allegations received and 

resolved by OCR during FYs 2017-18. OCR also resolved 16 compliance 

reviews involving a total of 33 Section 504/Title II issues, 29 of which 

were resolved with change. Many of these compliance reviews resulted 

in remedies that required institutions to provide improved and timely 

services to students with disabilities and to modify policies and practices 

on the restraint or seclusion of students with disabilities. 

Increases in Resolutions with Change in Key 

Disability Issue Categories 

During FYs 2017-18, OCR saw remarkable increases from the previous 

eight years in both resolutions, and resolutions with change, in certain 

categories of disability-related discrimination complaints. 

Resolutions for complaints alleging different treatment/exclusion/denial 

of benefts each year increased over 76% from the prior eight years, 

from 815 complaint resolutions per year on average in FYs 2009-16 to 

Figure 15: Section 504/Title II Tech Accessibility Complaints 

Resolved with Change in FYs 2009-18 

1,440.5 each year on average for FYs 2018-17. Resolutions with change 

for this discrimination complaint fling also increased over 92% from the 

previous eight years on average, from 110 to 212 resolutions with change 

in this category. 

Complaints identifying issues of accessibility related to recipients’ use 

of technology, insignifcant ten years ago, became one of the top four 

categories of disability complaints that OCR received. This category grew 

primarily due to complaints fled by or for individuals with disabilities 

concerning their access to websites of education institutions. In FYs 

2017-18, there were nearly 19 times more complaint resolutions related 

to technological or website accessibility on average compared to the 

previous eight years, from 52 resolutions in FYs 2009-16 to 986 in FYs 

2017-18. More remarkable is that there were 21 times more resolutions 

with change per year in this category comparing the two periods, from 23 

resolutions with change on average each year during the prior eight years 

to an average of 489 per year during FYs 2017-18. 

Figure 14: Section 504/Title II Different Treatment/Exclusion/Denial of 

Benefts Complaints Resolved with Change in FYs 2009-18 

Figure 16: Section 504/Title II Restraint and Seclusion 

Complaints Resolved With Change in FYs 2009-18 

21 

Office for Civil Rights | Fiscal Years 2017-18
Annual Report to the Secretary, the President, and the Congress

 

OCR also achieved a signifcant number of resolutions with change in 

complaints alleging an inappropriate use of restraint and seclusion. 

During FYs 2009-16 OCR resolved an average of only six complaints per 

year with change in this category. During FYs 2017-18, OCR more than 

tripled that yearly average – resolving an average of 21 complaints per 

year with change. 

The complaints and compliance reviews summarized below are a 

small but representative sampling of the types of Section 504/Title II 

investigations conducted by OCR and the remedies that were obtained 

as a result of the investigations. The remedies imposed were deemed 

appropriate for the facts of the specifc case. 

Case Summaries 

Ensuring Students Get the Accommodations and Academic 

Adjustments They Need 

A complaint alleged that a college denied academic adjustments made 

necessary by a student’s disability. OCR’s investigation found that the 

college failed to provide the student with a 72-hour waiting period to 

reschedule tests because of his disability-related treatments, refused to 

grant his request for a disability-related reduction in course load, and had 

neither appointed an individual to handle disability-related complaints 

nor published grievance procedures for such complaints. To resolve the 

matter, the college agreed to revise its policies and procedures relating 

to academic adjustments and auxiliary aids and services and to provide 

specifc remedies to the individual student. 

A complaint alleged that a university denied a student a necessary 

auxiliary aid. OCR’s investigation found that the college had denied the 

complainant’s request for a braille version of a textbook for a core highlevel mathematics class because the college deemed it too expensive. 

To resolve this matter, the college agreed to develop and implement a 

procedure for the timely production of alternate media for students with 

disabilities and to ensure the individual student’s particular needs would 

be met should the student re-enroll in the class. 

Ensuring Equal Access to Education Facilities 

A complaint alleged that a public school district failed to make a key 

facility accessible to individuals with mobility impairments. OCR’s 

investigation found the district to be in violation of Section 504 and Title 

II because the facility was not accessible to individuals with disabilities, 

including its entrances, classrooms, offces, gym, and restrooms. It was 

also determined that the district lacked an emergency evacuation plan for 

the facility. The district entered into a resolution agreement under which it 

agreed to, among other things, bring the physical facilities into compliance 

with Section 504 and Title II, conduct a self-evaluation of the facility to 

identify other potential accessibility issues, and develop an individualized 

emergency response plan for each student with a disability. 

Ensuring Equal Access to Technology and Online Resources 

A complaint alleged that a website for a school for the blind was 

not accessible to individuals with disabilities. In the course of their 

investigation, OCR staff noted missing document language, PDF fle 

inaccessibility, missing HTML tags, and empty or redundant links and 

headers. All of these conditions potentially hinder accessibility for 

individuals with disabilities. To resolve these allegations, the school 

signed a resolution agreement under which, among other things, the 

school agreed to conduct a thorough audit of the website, adopt policies 

and procedures to ensure that new content added to the website will 

be accessible, post notices on its website to help rectify problems 

with inaccessible content, and provide website accessibility training to 

appropriate personnel. 

Eliminating Preadmission Inquiries into Prospective 

Students’ Disability Status 

A complaint alleged that a school had rescinded an offer of acceptance 

issued to a student from the state’s school choice program because 

the student had disability-related needs. OCR’s investigation revealed 

suffcient evidence that the district had not only rescinded the one 

student’s acceptance based on that student’s disability status but also 

refused admission to students with disability-related needs in two 

other instances. To resolve the matter, the district signed a resolution 

agreement under which it was required to, among other things, revise its 

school choice program application to remove any questions related to an 

applicant’s disability status and provide training to the district’s admissions 

staff concerning the revised procedures and the district’s obligations 

relating to evaluation and placement under Section 504 and Title II. 

Policy Review: Website Accessibility 

In FY 2018, OCR launched a new technical assistance initiative 

to assist recipients in making their websites and online programs 

accessible to individuals with disabilities, as required by Section 

504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 and Title II of the Americans 

with Disabilities Act. Through webinars, OCR provided information 

technology professionals with vital information on website 

accessibility, including guidance for making online programs 

accessible. These webinars reached over 3,000 individuals from 

over 100 different locations. In all, OCR organized and led 19 

webinars on website accessibility, a 58% increase over the 12 such 

webinars OCR conducted in FY 2017. In addition, OCR has increased 

enforcement activities related to website accessibility. In recent 

years, a single individual has fled hundreds of OCR complaints 

related to the accessibility of education institutions’ websites 

to individuals with disabilities. OCR has resolved many of these 

complaints with resolution agreements and continues to investigate 

others through the vehicle of directed investigations. 

22 
The Age Discrimination

Act of 1975 and the Boy

Scouts of America Equal

Access Act of 2001 

OCR also has jurisdiction against discrimination based on the Age 

Discrimination Act of 1975 and the Boy Scouts of America Equal Access 

Act of 2001. The Age Discrimination Act prohibits discrimination based 

on age. It states: “[N]o person in the United States shall, on the basis of 

age, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefts of, or be 

subjected to discrimination under, any program or activity receiving Federal 

fnancial assistance.” The Act therefore applies to state educational 

elementary and secondary schools, colleges and universities, vocational 

schools, proprietary school systems, state vocational rehabilitation 

agencies, libraries, and museums. 

The Boy Scouts of America Equal Access Act prohibits any public 

elementary and secondary school, or state or local education agency that 

receives Department funds, from discriminating against any group offcially 

affliated with the Boy Scouts of America and any other youth group listed 

in Title 36 of the U.S. Code (as a patriotic society). Specifcally, the statute 

prohibits covered entities that provide meeting spaces for outside groups 

from denying the Boy Scouts and other protected youth groups equal 

access to or a fair opportunity to meet. 

Of the 31,871 complaints that OCR resolved in FYs 2017-18, 1,382 

(4.3%) included at least one alleged violation of the Age Discrimination 

Act. OCR resolved 31 (2%) age discrimination allegations with change, 

including allegations that a school system or institution discriminated 

based on age with respect to admissions, grievance procedures, fnancial 

aid, or access to programs or activities or that it retaliated against 

individuals who asserted their rights or those of others under the Age 

Discrimination Act. 

In FYs 2017-18, OCR received 51 (0.1%) complaints that alleged at 

least one violation of the Boy Scouts Act. None of those allegations were 

resolved with change. 

23 
Annual Report to the Secretary, the President, and the Congress

The Civil Rights Data

Collection 

OCR collects and publishes Civil Rights Data Collection (CRDC) data on a 

biennial basis. In April 2018, OCR released the 2015-16 CRDC data. The 

data, which is self-reported, included information on over 96,400 public 

schools, 17,300 public school districts, and 50.6 million students across 

the nation. 

Strengthening Data Quality 

In 2018, OCR took action to improve data quality by conducting data 

quality reviews of CRDC information submitted by school districts that 

had reported zero values, or no incidents, in their restraint and seclusion 

data for the 2015-16 CRDC. OCR contacted 50 school districts — four 

districts from each of OCR’s 12 enforcement regions and the two districts 

with large identical restraint and seclusion values — and asked the school 

districts to review their data and respond to OCR in writing to explain 

whether the data were complete and accurate or needed to be amended. 

The data quality aspect of the initiative is the frst major effort of its 

kind; never before has OCR focused on data quality as a part of a major 

compliance initiative. 

Highlighting the Use of Restraint and Seclusion 

In addition, to assist school districts improve the quality of their CRDC data 

collected and submitted, OCR provides numerous resources, including a 

CRDC Resource Center website and a Partner Support Center (PSC) or 

help desk. The CRDC Resource Center website (https://crdc.grads360.org) 

contains an extensive collection of technical assistance documents. The 

PSC provides technical assistance directly to school districts, including 

frst-time data submitters. 

New Data on School Safety and STEM 

For the frst time, the 2015-16 CRDC included comprehensive data on 

the incidents of criminal offenses in our nation’s public schools and 

several new categories of data on STEM course taking. Using the 

2015-16 CRDC data, OCR released two topic-specifc issue briefs that 

provided certain data highlights: “School Climate and Safety”10 and 

“STEM Course Taking.”11 

School climate generally refers to interrelated aspects of the quality and 

character of school life. The CRDC School Climate and Safety issue brief 

focused on one element of school climate: safety. To evaluate how safe 

students are at school, the CRDC collected data on serious offenses, law 

enforcement referrals and school-related arrests, harassment and bullying, 

restraint and seclusion, and school discipline. 

The issue brief entitled “STEM Course Taking” includes information 

collected through the CRDC concerning information concerning the STEM 

courses available to students in the nation’s schools. The data include 

course enrollment and course availability for some middle school and high 

school courses. Middle school courses include Algebra I and Geometry. 

High school courses include Algebra I and Geometry as well as Algebra 

II, advanced mathematics, Calculus, Biology, Chemistry, and Physics. The 

CRDC also collected student passing data on Algebra I in middle school 

and high school. 

The 2015-16 CRDC also collected noteworthy information on the use of 

restraint and seclusion. Mechanical restraint is the use of any device or 

equipment to restrict a student’s freedom of movement. Physical restraint 

is a personal restriction that immobilizes or reduces the ability of a student 

to move their torso, arms, legs, or head freely. Seclusion is the involuntary confnement of a student alone in a room or area that the student 

is physically prevented from leaving. During the 2015-16 school year, 

124,500 students (approximately 0.2% of all students enrolled) across the 

nation were physically restrained, mechanically restrained, or secluded. 

Nearly 87,000 of those students were subjected to physical or mechanical 

restraint, and over 37,500 were subjected to seclusion. 

Reporting on Bullying and Harassment 

The 2015-16 CRDC also expanded the type of data it collected related 

to incidents of bullying and harassment in K-12 schools. For the frst 

time ever, the CRDC reported on the number of incidents of bullying and 

harassment based on religion. Overall, approximately 135,200 individual 

allegations of harassment or bullying based on sex, race, sexual orientation, disability, or religion were reported during the 2015-16 school year. 

Almost 10,000 allegations, or 8%, of all the reported incidents were in this 

new religion category. 

Preparing the 2017-18 CRDC 

Beginning in FY 2016, OCR began preparing for the 2017-18 CRDC. As 

with previous collections, the 2017-18 CRDC went through the Offce of 

Management and Budget (OMB) information collection packet clearance 

process. OCR received a record 1,470 public comments during 60-day 

and 30-day public comment periods. OMB approved the 2017-18 CRDC 

under the Paperwork Reduction Act on October 16, 2017. For the 2017-

18 CRDC, new data elements include computer science classes and 

school internet access. Additionally, in an effort to reduce the reporting 

burden on schools, districts, and local education agencies, OCR elected 

to drop the collection of data on high school equivalency course exam 

results, Advanced Placement course exam results, and student chronic 

absenteeism from the CRDC. 

24 
Looking Ahead 

Reforming Title IX Through Formal Rulemaking 

In November 2018, the Department released its proposal on improving 

schools’ responses to sexual harassment and assault. The proposed 

regulation under Title IX was developed after more than a year of research, 

deliberation, and gathering input from students, advocates, school 

administrators, Title IX coordinators, and other stakeholders. 

The Department’s proposed rule takes the important and historic step of 

defning sexual harassment under Title IX and what it means for a student 

to report it. It requires schools to respond meaningfully to every report of 

sexual harassment and ensures that due process protections are in place 

for all students. The Department’s proposed rule seeks to ensure that all 

schools clearly understand their legal obligations under Title IX and that all 

students clearly understand their options and rights. 

The Department’s proposed rule was published in the Federal Register and 

was open for public comment from early November 2018 to late January 

2019. To date, over 124,000 comments to the rule have been submitted 

to the Department, the substance of each of which the Department is 

reviewing. The Department anticipates issuing the rule as fnal in 

FY 2020.12 

Active Enforcement of Title IX 

Sexual Violence on College Campuses 

OCR continues to vigorously enforce the provisions of Title IX. In 

September 2019, the Department announced it would fne Michigan State 

University (MSU) a record $4.5 million and require the university to make 

major changes to its Title IX procedures following its systemic failure 

to protect students from sexual abuse. The fne and required corrective 

action come after two separate investigations, one by the offce of Federal 

Student Aid and the other by OCR, as directed by Secretary DeVos. 

In February 2018, Secretary DeVos had directed OCR to launch a systemic 

investigation into MSU’s handling of reports of sexual violence against 

former employee and adjunct professor Dr. Larry Nassar. Concurrently, 

Federal Student Aid continued its investigation into the university’s 

compliance with the Jeanne Clery Disclosure of Campus Security Policy 

and Campus Crime Statistics Act (Clery Act). As part of its investigation, 

OCR reviewed hundreds of sexual assault reports; interviewed 47 

witnesses, including survivors; and reviewed tens of thousands of 

documents. OCR’s investigation revealed that MSU failed to adequately 

respond to reports of sexual misconduct by Nassar and William Strampel 

(the former dean of MSU’s College of Osteopathic Medicine and Nassar’s 

supervisor), failed to take appropriate interim measures to protect its 

students while complaints against Nassar and Strampel were pending, 

and failed to take prompt and effective steps to end any harassment, 

eliminate the hostile environment, and prevent any further harassment 

from recurring. As a result of the investigation, MSU signed a resolution 

agreement to address the Title IX violations. 

Sexual Violence in K-12 

Also in September 2019, OCR announced it had signed a resolution 

agreement with Chicago Public Schools (CPS) that will require the district 

to make signifcant internal structural and procedural changes to protect 

students from sexual assault and abuse. The resolution agreement comes 

after OCR opened investigations into two separate complaints alleging 

that the district failed to respond to sexual harassment and sexual assault 

of students by both teachers and peers and after OCR initiated a third 

systemic, district-wide investigation. As a result of its investigations, OCR 

concluded that, for years, CPS’s management, handling, and oversight of 

complaints of student-on-student and adult-on-student sexual harassment 

has violated Title IX. Specifcally, OCR’s investigation revealed that the 

district’s Title IX investigations were inadequate, unreliable, and often 

conducted by untrained staff. In addition, there was no coordination 

of the district’s Title IX responsibilities. Based on the defciencies in 

CPS’s Title IX procedures and in the district’s handling of complaints 

of sexual misconduct, OCR is requiring the district to take specifc 

affrmative corrective actions to rectify the many procedural and structural 

defciencies in the district’s Title IX policies. 

Restraint and Seclusion Initiative 

On January 17, 2019, Secretary DeVos announced the Department’s 

initiative to address the inappropriate use of restraint and seclusion in our 

nation’s K-12 schools.13 OCR together with the Office of Special Education 

and Rehabilitative Services (OSERS) will oversee the initiative, which 

includes three components that draw upon the work and expertise of 

OCR and OSERS staff: compliance reviews conducted by OCR on various 

recipients’ use of restraint and seclusion, data quality reviews by OCR to 

improve the quality of restraint and seclusion data submitted as part of the 

CRDC, and technical assistant provided by OCR and OSERS to schools, 

districts, and local education agencies. In addition to helping schools 

and districts understand how federal law applies to the use of restraint 

and seclusion, the Department is supporting schools seeking resources 

and information on the appropriate use of interventions and supports to 

address the behavioral needs of students with disabilities. In these ways, 

the initiative focuses on providing support to schools, districts, and local 

education agencies while also strengthening enforcement activities in 

order to better protect students with disabilities and their families. 

Compliance Reviews 

Compliance reviews focused on recipients’ use of restraint and seclusion 

on children with disabilities will be conducted by OCR’s 12 regional 

enforcement offces. These compliance reviews concentrate on the 

possible inappropriate use of restraint of seclusion and the effect of such 

practices on the school’s obligation to provide FAPE for all children with 

disabilities. OCR’s regional offces identify recipients for review based on 

various sources of information, including reported data, news reports, and 

information from students, parents, advocacy groups, and community 

organizations. Opening a compliance review does not indicate that OCR 

has reached a conclusion as to whether a violation of any federal 

law exists. 

25 

Office for Civil Rights | Fiscal Years 2017-18
Annual Report to the Secretary, the President, and the Congress

 

Data Quality Reviews 

After the conclusion of the 2017-18 CRDC, OCR began a two-week-long 

data quality review period during which it conducted outreach to schools 

focused on improving the accuracy of data reported on the use of restraint 

and seclusion and helping schools correct any misreported data. Outside 

of the data quality review period, OCR has also initiated a number of data 

quality reviews and is actively working with school districts to review and 

improve restraint and seclusion data as reported to the CRDC. OCR will 

continue to work directly with school districts to review and improve not 

only the previously mentioned restraint and seclusion data submitted as a 

part of the CRDC but also on other categories of CRDC data. To ensure the 

integrity of CRDC information, OCR expects to conduct data quality reviews 

of other categories with zero or low values reported in school districts’ 

CRDC submissions. As part of these reviews, OCR will provide technical 

assistance to schools on data quality to ensure that they are collecting and 

reporting accurate data relating to the use of restraint and seclusion. 

Between the CRDC data quality reviews conducted by the headquarters 

offce and compliance reviews conducted by regional offces, OCR will 

interact directly with over 70 recipients and will work with them to correct 

any noncompliance that is found. 

Technical Assistance 

Technical assistance to public schools will be provided by OCR on the 

legal requirements of Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act relating to 

the use of restraint and seclusion on children with disabilities. OCR will 

partner with OSERS to provide joint technical assistance to support 

recipients in understanding how Section 504, Title II, and the Individuals 

with Disabilities Education Act, or IDEA, informs the development and 

implementation of policies governing the use of restraint and seclusion. 

OSERS will support recipients identifed by OCR through compliance 

reviews or through the complaint resolution process to ensure they have 

access to appropriate technical assistance and support. Additionally, 

OSERS will support schools to ensure they have access to available 

resources as they establish or enhance environments where the 

implementation of interventions and supports reduces the needs for 

reliance on less effective and potentially dangerous practices. OSERS will 

also consider how current investments may be utilized to provide support 

and training to schools, districts, and states. Lastly, OCR and OSERS will 

jointly plan and conduct webinars for interested parties related to the use 

of appropriate interventions and supports for all students. 

Web Accessibility Technical Assistance Initiative 

In addition to the restraint and seclusion initiative, OCR continues to 

assist schools, districts, and local education agencies through its web 

accessibility initiative, which was frst announced in May 2018.14 Similar 

to the restraint and seclusion initiative, the web accessibility initiative will 

combine strengthened enforcement efforts with a focus on supporting 

schools, districts, and local education agencies through technical support. 

Beginning in May and June 2018, OCR has hosted a series of webinars 

to assist schools, districts, state education agencies, libraries, colleges, 

and universities in making their websites and online programs accessible 

to individuals with disabilities. These initial webinars reached over 3,000 

individuals from over 100 different locations. In FY 2019, OCR introduced 

the enforcement component of this initiative when it initiated over 600 

directed investigations related to web accessibility. OCR also created a 

dedicated team of 13 OCR staff working exclusively on web accessibility 

complaints and directed investigations, under central oversight by 

headquarters to ensure consistency in the investigator approach to such 

cases. Even during the course of these investigations, OCR is committed 

to supporting schools, districts, and local education agencies and working 

with the schools to inform the schools of any compliance concerns and 

address the concerns as needed. 

26 
18000 640 

6000 

8000 

10000 

12000 

14000 

16000 

520 

540 

560 

580 

600 

620 

OCR Complaints Received 

OCR Full Time Equivalents 

4000 500 

2000 480 

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 

Complaints Received 6,369 6,936 7,840 7,834 9,956 9,992 10,397 16,764 12,842 12,435 

OCR Full Time Equivalents 582 585 619 582 565 544 540 563 579 534 

Hiring Initiative 

As noted earlier in this report, the number of complaints received by OCR 

has doubled from FY 2008 to FY 2018. This has occurred while OCR’s 

staff has decreased from 614 persons in FY 2008 to 534 persons in FY 

2018. Yet, as seen in this report, the number of case resolutions by OCR 

staff has kept pace with rising caseload levels over the past several years. 

This achievement is a testimony to the efforts of the dedicated career 

professionals of OCR who work diligently to evaluate, investigate, and 

resolve any and all meritorious discrimination complaints from the nation’s 

students and their families. 

In FYs 2018-19, OCR received $8.5 million in additional funding 

from Congress to hire over 100 additional staff for OCR’s 12 regional 

enforcement offces and headquarters as needed by the end of FY 

2019. To meet this ambitious timeframe, OCR acquired the personnel 

staff support through detailed employees to start the hiring initiative and 

worked with the Department’s Offce of Finance and Operations to ensure 

hiring actions were progressing at an aggressive pace. OCR created 

internal hiring panels to expediate the interview schedule of the numerous 

candidates across all 12 regions and held weekly hiring meetings to 

ensure hiring efforts were prioritized. With an increase in additional 

funding and necessary resources, OCR will be even more equipped to 

handle its rising caseload and even better positioned to continue ensuring 

more effective and more timely law enforcement. OCR remains committed 

to meeting the ambitious hiring goals that were put in place and will 

continue to dedicate resources to ensure OCR is appropriately staffed and 

well equipped to protect our nation’s students. By the end of FY 2019, 

OCR substantially completed the hiring of these additional staff. 

Opening of the 2017-18 CRDC 

In January 2019, OCR announced the opening of the 2017-18 CRDC. 

The data submission system opened to 14 state education agencies 

(SEAs) that support their school districts. The SEAs pre-populate the 

CRDC survey forms with data collected and submitted for other state-level 

federal reporting to reduce the reporting burden on their school districts. 

OCR implemented a pilot program during the 2013-14 CRDC to support 

SEA engagement to improve the quality of CRDC data collected. The 

collaboration efforts expanded for the 2015-16 and the 2017-18 CRDCs. 

Past efforts resulted in SEAs providing between 40 and 100% of the 

required data elements that otherwise would have to be completed by the 

school districts. School districts gained access to the 2017-18 CRDC data 

submission system beginning on February 4, 2019. Each school district is 

given a minimum of 75 calendar days to submit and certify their data. The 

submission system closed on June 21, 2019. 

Figure 17: OCR Staffng Levels and Complaints Received in FYs 2009-18 

27 

Office for Civil Rights | Fiscal Years 2017-18
Annual Report to the Secretary, the President, and the Congress

Endnotes 

28 

Offce for Civil Rights 

Kenneth L. Marcus, Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights 

Lyndon Baines Johnson Building 

U.S. Department of Education 

400 Maryland Avenue, SW , Washington, DC 20202-1100 

Telephone: 800-421-3481 | FAX: 202-453-6012 

Email: OCR@ed.gov | www.ed.gov/ocr 

U.S. Department of Education 

Office for Civil Rights

 

1 A single complaint fled with OCR may allege more than one civil 

rights violation. Moreover, an individual complaint may allege more 

than one type of violation under a single civil rights statute or may 

allege several violations under more than one statute. 

2 Often a single complaint contains more than one allegation of 

discrimination. Please note that this report includes data on both the 

total number of allegations and the total number of complaints. 

3 Throughout this report, data on the number of allegations in discrete 

issue areas received and resolved by OCR in prior fscal years 

may vary slightly when compared to the data reported in previous 

publications. This is because case information continues to be 

updated in OCR’s database as cases are processed, investigated, and 

resolved, resulting in changes to the categorization of some cases. 

4 As used in this report, case resolutions include cases that result in 

dismissal, administrative closure, a fnding of no violation, an early 

complaint resolution, a resolution requiring action by institutions 

without a resolution agreement, or a negotiated resolution agreement. 

5 In this report, unless otherwise specifed, schools means elementary 

and secondary schools or school districts, postsecondary colleges 

or universities, and any other type of education institution receiving 

federal fnancial assistance. 

6 The number of complaint resolutions per year is greater than the 

number of complaints received per year for FYs 2017-18 because 

some of the resolved complaints were fled with OCR in previous 

fscal years. 

7 For the full text of Executive Order 13771, see https://www. 

federalregister.gov/documents/2017/02/03/2017-02451/reducingregulation-and-controlling-regulatory-costs. 

Availability of Alternate Formats: 

8 See “Pending Cases Currently Under Investigation at ElementarySecondary and Postsecondary Schools” database, https://www2. 

ed.gov/about/offces/list/ocr/docs/investigations/open-investigations/ 

index.html. 

9 See Press Release, Department of Education Issues New Interim 

Guidance on Campus Sexual Misconduct, https://www.ed.gov/news/ 

press-releases/department-education-issues-new-interim-guidancecampus-sexual-misconduct. 

10 For the full text of “School Climate and Safety,” see https://www2. 

ed.gov/about/offces/list/ocr/docs/school-climate-and-safety.pdf. 

11 For the full text of “STEM Course Taking,” see https://www2.ed.gov/ 

about/offces/list/ocr/docs/stem-course-taking.pdf. 

12 See Press Release, Secretary DeVos: Proposed Title IX Rule Provides 

Clarity for Schools, Support for Survivors, and Due Process Rights 

for All, https://www.ed.gov/news/press-releases/secretary-devosproposed-title-ix-rule-provides-clarity-schools-support-survivors-anddue-process-rights-all. 

13 See Press Release, U.S. Department of Education Announces Initiative 

to Address the Inappropriate Use of Restraint and Seclusion to Protect 

Children with Disabilities, Ensure Compliance with Federal Laws, 

https://www.ed.gov/news/press-releases/us-department-educationannounces-initiative-address-inappropriate-use-restraint-andseclusion-protect-children-disabilities-ensure-compliance-federallaws. 

14 See Press Release, U.S. Department of Education Launches New 

Website Accessibility Technical Assistance Initiative, https://www. 

ed.gov/news/press-releases/us-department-education-launchesnew-website-accessibility-technical-assistance-initiative. 

Requests for documents in alternate formats such as braille or large print should be submitted to the Alternate Format Center by calling 

1.202.260.0852 or by contacting the Section 508 Coordinator via email at om_eeos@ed.gov. 

Notice to Limited-English-Profcient Persons: 

If you have diffculty understanding English, you may request language assistance services for Department information that is available to 

the public. These language assistance services are available free of charge. If you need more information about interpretation or translation 

services, please call 1-800-USA-LEARN (1.800.872.5327) (TTY: 1.800.877.8339) or email us at ED.Language.Assistance@ed.gov. You 

also can write to U.S. Department of Education, Information Resource Center, LBJ Education Building, 400 Maryland Ave. SW, 

Washington, DC, 20202.