DEPARTAMENTO DE EDUCACIÓN DE EE.UU.
OFICINA DE EDUCACIÓN ESPECIAL Y SERVICIOS DE REHABILITACIÓN
OFICINA DE PROGRAMAS DE EDUCACIÓN ESPECIAL

6 de julio de 2020
La Oficina de Programas de Educación Especial (OSEP), que pertenece a la Oficina de
Educación Especial y Servicios de Rehabilitación del Departamento de Educación de
EE.UU. (Departamento), emite este documento de Preguntas y Respuestas (Questions
and Answers, Q & A) en respuesta a consultas relacionadas con la implementación de
los plazos de evaluación y valoración de la Parte C de la Ley de Educación para
Personas con Discapacidades (Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, IDEA) en el
entorno actual de la COVID-19.
Este documento de Preguntas y Respuestas no impone ningún requisito adicional más
allá de los incluidos en las leyes y regulaciones aplicables. No crea ni confiere ningún
derecho a ninguna persona. Las respuestas presentadas en este documento
constituyen, en general, una guía informal que representa la interpretación del
Departamento de los requisitos legales o reglamentarios aplicables en el contexto de
los hechos específicos presentados aquí y no son legalmente vinculantes ni establecen
una política o regla que pudiera aplicarse en todas las circunstancias.
Para revisar otros documentos de preguntas y respuestas ofrecidos por la OSEP en
relación con la COVID-19, visite https://sites.ed.gov/idea/topic-areas/#COVID-19.
Puede encontrar información adicional específica sobre la pandemia de COVID-19 en
el sitio web https://www.ed.gov/coronavirus.

EVALUACIÓN INICIAL Y PLAZOS DE EVALUACIÓN
La parte C de la Ley IDEA requiere una evaluación multidisciplinaria integral y oportuna
para determinar la elegibilidad de cada niño, desde el nacimiento hasta los dos años,
que sea derivado para una evaluación o servicios de intervención temprana y del que
se sospeche que tiene una discapacidad. Si se determina que el niño es elegible, se
realiza una evaluación para determinar los servicios y apoyos de intervención
temprana apropiados para el niño y la familia.
P1.

¿Qué excepciones están disponibles para una agencia principal estatal (State
LA) y sus proveedores de servicios de intervención temprana (EIS) para cumplir
con el requisito del plazo de 45 días para realizar evaluaciones y valoraciones
iniciales y reuniones del Plan de Servicio Familiar Individualizado (IFSP) cuando

400 MARYLAND AVE. S.W., WASHINGTON, DC 20202-2800
www.ed.gov
El Departamento de Educación tiene como misión promover el alto rendimiento académico y la preparación de los
estudiantes para la competitividad global al fomentar la excelencia en la educación y garantizar la igualdad de acceso.

el acceso a los hogares y las instalaciones es limitado o existen restricciones
que impiden las reuniones presenciales?
El plazo de 45 días de la Parte C de la Ley IDEA se encuentra en el Título 34 §§ 303.310,
303.342(a) y 303.345(c) del CFR. El plazo de 45 días se aplica a lo siguiente:
1) Todo examen de detección ofrecido por el Estado.
2) La evaluación inicial.
3) La valoración inicial del niño y la familia.
4) La reunión inicial del Plan de Servicio Familiar Individualizado (Individualized
Family Service Plan, IFSP).
El requisito de plazo incluye dos excepciones permitidas:
1) El niño o los padres no están disponibles para completar el examen de
detección (si corresponde), la evaluación inicial, las valoraciones iniciales del
niño y la familia, o la reunión inicial del IFSP debido a circunstancias familiares
excepcionales que están documentadas en los registros de intervención
temprana del niño; o
2) Los padres no han dado su consentimiento para el examen de detección (si
corresponde), la evaluación inicial o la valoración inicial del niño, a pesar de
los intentos repetidos y documentados de la agencia principal estatal o el
proveedor de servicios de intervención temprana (early intervention services,
EIS) para obtener el consentimiento de los padres.
Históricamente, la OSEP también ha aplicado esta excepción documentada de
"circunstancias familiares excepcionales" cuando circunstancias claras fuera del
control del proveedor de EIS o de la agencia principal estatal, como un huracán, no
permiten que se dé lugar a la actividad subyacente y, por lo tanto, el niño y la familia
no están disponibles como una cuestión práctica.1 En estas circunstancias muy
limitadas, según el Título 34 § 303.310(c) del CFR, la agencia principal estatal o el
proveedor de EIS deben:
1) Documentar en el registro de intervención temprana del niño las
circunstancias familiares excepcionales; y
2) Completar las actividades tan pronto como sea posible después de que ya
no existan las circunstancias familiares excepcionales documentadas.

1

Tenga en cuenta que esta excepción no se aplica si el personal de la agencia principal estatal o del
proveedor de EIS no está disponible debido a la escasez de personal, etc.

2

El Departamento reconoce que es probable que no se completen algunas o ninguna
de las actividades requeridas dentro del plazo de 45 días de forma remota. Por
ejemplo, realizar una observación en persona puede ser fundamental para garantizar
una evaluación y una valoración adecuadas. Dado que las reuniones en persona
pueden no ser factibles o recomendables debido a la pandemia de COVID-19, tales
restricciones pueden constituir una circunstancia familiar excepcional documentada
que califica para una excepción al plazo de 45 días. En estas situaciones, la agencia
principal estatal o el proveedor de EIS deben documentar la aplicación de la
excepción en el registro de intervención temprana del niño y completar la evaluación,
la valoración o el IFSP inicial retrasados tan pronto como sea posible después de que
las circunstancias excepcionales ya no existan. La determinación de si existe una
circunstancia familiar excepcional debe hacerse caso por caso. El plazo de 45 días no
se puede extender para todos los niños dentro de un estado bajo el supuesto de que
la COVID-19 es una circunstancia familiar excepcional para todas las familias.

IFSP Provisorio2
P2.

¿Pueden las agencias principales estatales y sus proveedores locales de EIS
utilizar el IFSP provisorio hasta que se pueda realizar una evaluación o una
reunión presencial?

Sí. El IFSP provisorio puede ser útil cuando no se puede desarrollar un IFSP inicial y los
padres y las agencias principales estatales o los proveedores de EIS acuerdan los
servicios del IFSP que necesita el niño y la familia elegibles.3 El Departamento quiere
resaltar que el uso del término “IFSP provisorios” es para cuando las circunstancias
familiares excepcionales documentadas causaron un retraso en la finalización de la
evaluación inicial y las valoraciones durante el requisito del plazo de 45 días.
Todo servicio de intervención temprana que se haya determinado como necesario y
que puede estar disponible de inmediato para el niño y la familia del niño,
particularmente aquellos que se pueden proporcionar de forma remota
(específicamente durante la pandemia cuando las reuniones en persona están
limitadas), con consentimiento de los padres, puede comenzar antes de la finalización
de la evaluación o las valoraciones.

2

Se puede implementar un IFSP provisorio con el consentimiento de los padres conforme al Título 34 §
303.345 del CFR para proporcionar servicios de la Parte C de la Ley IDEA antes de que se completen la
evaluación o la valoración, y además debe incluir el nombre del coordinador de servicios responsable,
de acuerdo con el Título 34 § 303.344(g) del CFR. El coordinador de servicios implementará el IFSP
provisorio y coordinará con otras agencias o personas según corresponda.

3

Los requisitos para un IFSP provisorio se encuentran en el Título 34 §§ 303.310(c) y 303.345 del CFR.

3

REALIZACIÓN DE UNA EVALUACIÓN Y VALORACIÓN
P3.

¿Cómo puede una agencia principal estatal o sus proveedores de EIS realizar
evaluaciones para determinar la elegibilidad de un niño para la Parte C de la
Ley IDEA o realizar la valoración del niño cuando el personal no puede realizar
reuniones en persona o realizar visitas domiciliarias debido a la pandemia?

El Departamento reconoce que las medidas de distanciamiento social y otras
limitaciones durante la pandemia pueden hacer impracticable la administración de la
mayoría de las evaluaciones en persona y pueden imponer limitaciones sobre cómo se
llevan a cabo las evaluaciones y la valoración del niño en virtud de la Parte C de la
Ley IDEA. Por lo tanto, el Departamento destaca la opción de utilizar registros
médicos,4 cuando corresponda, para establecer la elegibilidad sin realizar una
evaluación. Incluso cuando se utilizan registros médicos para establecer la elegibilidad,
la agencia principal estatal o el proveedor de EIS deben realizar una valoración
adecuada5 del niño y una valoración dirigida a la familia.6
Las agencias principales estatales podrían considerar investigar los instrumentos y
herramientas de valoración disponibles para determinar si algunos de ellos pueden
administrarse o completarse de forma remota durante la pandemia, siempre que la
evaluación del niño se base en la observación personal (ya sea en persona o por
videoconferencia). Las agencias principales estatales también pueden trabajar con los
desarrolladores de sus instrumentos de valoración actuales para determinar si estos se
pueden administrar o completar de forma remota, sin afectar significativamente la
validez de los resultados.

4

La opción de usar registros médicos para determinar la elegibilidad se menciona en el Título 34 §
303.321(a)(3)(i) del CFR.

5

La valoración del niño debe incluir: una revisión de los resultados de la evaluación, observaciones
personales del niño e identificación de las necesidades del niño en cada una de las áreas de
desarrollo. Título 34 § 303.321(c)(1) del CFR.

6

La evaluación dirigida a la familia debe, entre otros requisitos, basarse en la información obtenida a
través de una herramienta de valoración y mediante una entrevista a los miembros de la familia
apropiados. Título 34 § 303.321(c)(2) del CFR.

4


UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
OFFICE OF SPECIAL EDUCATION AND REHABILITATIVE SERVICES
OFFICE OF SPECIAL EDUCATION PROGRAMS

June 30, 2020
The Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP), within the U.S. Department of
Education’s (Department) Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services,
issues this Question and Answer (Q & A) document in response to inquiries concerning
implementation of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) Part B
procedural safeguards in the current COVID-19 environment.
This Q & A document does not impose any additional requirements beyond those
included in applicable law and regulations. It does not create or confer any rights for or
on any person. The responses presented in this document generally constitute informal
guidance representing the interpretation of the Department of the applicable statutory
or regulatory requirements in the context of the specific facts presented here and are
not legally binding and does not establish a policy or rule that would apply in all
circumstances.
To review other Q & A documents that OSEP has provided related to COVID-19, please
visit https://sites.ed.gov/idea/topic-areas/#COVID-19. Additional information specific to
the COVID-19 pandemic may be found online at https://www.ed.gov/coronavirus.

IDEA PART B PROCEDURAL SAFEGUARDS
Parental Consent
Q1.

May a public agency accept an electronic or digital signature to indicate that
the parent consents to their child’s initial evaluation, reevaluation, or the initial
provision of special education and related services to their child?

Yes, so long as the public agency ensures there are appropriate safeguards in place to
protect the integrity of the process. IDEA requires public agencies to obtain informed
consent from the parent of the child, consistent with 34 C.F.R. § 300.9, before
conducting an initial evaluation and a reevaluation of a child, subject to certain
exceptions, and before the initial provision of special education and related services to
the child. 34 C.F.R. § 300.300. Under 34 C.F.R. § 300.9, consent, which must be voluntary
on the part of the parent, means the parent has been fully informed of, and agrees in
writing to the activity for which his or her consent has been requested. Because of
social distancing and other restrictions during the pandemic, it may not be possible to
obtain a parent’s signed, written consent in-person.
In developing appropriate safeguards for using electronic or digital signatures during
the pandemic, a public agency may determine that a “signed and dated written
400 MARYLAND AVE. S.W., WASHINGTON, DC 20202-2800
www.ed.gov
The Department of Education’s mission is to promote student achievement and preparation for global competitiveness
by fostering educational excellence and ensuring equal access.

consent” may include a record and signature in electronic form that identifies and
authenticates a particular person as the source of the consent and indicates such
person’s approval of the information contained in the electronic consent. See
34 C.F.R. § 99.30(d) (consent for disclosure of personally identifiable information (PII)
from education records).
These safeguards also should include a statement that indicates that the parent has
been fully informed of the relevant activity and that the consent is voluntary on the part
of the parent consistent with the IDEA definition of “consent” in 34 C.F.R. § 300.9. During
the pandemic, the Department considers the use of these safeguards to be sufficient
for public agencies to use in accepting electronic signatures for parental consent
under IDEA for the activities described above.
Q2.

May a public agency accept a parent’s electronic or digital signature as written
parental consent to disclose PII from the child’s education records?

Yes, so long as the safeguards described in Q1 above are applied and met. That is,
electronic signatures for consent may be accepted to satisfy the IDEA Part B consent
requirements for disclosure of PII from education records if there are appropriate
safeguards, which could include the use of the safeguards for granting consent
electronically to release PII from education records described in the response to Q1
above. 34 C.F.R. § 99.30(d).
In addition, under 34 C.F.R. 300.9, consent, which must be voluntary on the part of the
parent, means the parent has been fully informed of, and agrees in writing to the
activity for which his or her consent has been requested. Parental consent must be
obtained before PII is disclosed to parties other than officials of participating agencies
or unless a specific exception applies under 34 C.F.R. § 300.622(b) of the IDEA Part B
regulations or under the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) and its
implementing regulations at 34 C.F.R. Part 99. 1 34 C.F.R. § 300.622. In addition, under
Part B of IDEA, these safeguards should include a statement that indicates that the
parent has been fully informed of the relevant activity and that the consent is voluntary
on the part of the parent consistent with the IDEA definition of “consent” in
34 C.F.R.§ 300.9.
IDEA Part B also requires that prior to accessing a child’s or parent’s public benefits or
insurance for the first time and after providing the annual notification to parents
consistent with 34 C.F.R. § 300.154(d)(2)(v), the public agency must obtain written
consent from the parent that meets the requirements of 34 C.F.R. §§ 99.30 and
300.622, for disclosure of PII from education records to a State’s public benefits or

1 For further information regarding consent for disclosure of PII, see Understanding the

Confidentiality Requirements Applicable to IDEA Early Childhood Programs Frequently Asked
Questions (October 2016).

2

insurance program (e.g., Medicaid) in order for the public agency to bill that State’s
program for services provided under 34 C.F.R. Part 300. 34 C.F.R. § 300.154(d)(2)(iv).
Prior Written Notice
Q3.

How can a public agency provide parents with prior written notice required
under 34 C.F.R. § 300.503, while school buildings and other public agency
facilities are closed due to the pandemic?

A public agency must provide parents written notice a reasonable time before it
proposes or refuses to initiate or change the identification, evaluation, educational
placement of the child, or the provision of a free appropriate public education (FAPE)
to the child. 34 C.F.R. § 300.503. If the parent has previously agreed, or agrees during
the pandemic, the prior written notice can be provided through electronic mail (email).
34 C.F.R. § 300.505.
The term, “reasonable time” is not defined in the regulation. The Department believes
that it would be appropriate to consider factors such as the closure of public and
school buildings and facilities, social distancing, and other health-related orders during
the pandemic in determining what constitutes a reasonable time for this purpose.
Nevertheless, public agencies should make every effort to ensure that written notice is
provided as soon as possible prior to the proposed or refused action.
The determination of when prior written notice is required depends on the particular
facts and circumstances, but OSEP encourages public agencies to ensure that parents
are fully informed of how their child’s special education and related services needs are
addressed during remote learning.
Procedural Safeguards Notice
Q4.

Given the challenges associated with school operations during the pandemic,
how can a public agency ensure that a copy of the procedural safeguards
available to parents under IDEA is provided in accordance with
34 C.F.R. § 300.504(a)?

The public agency can provide a parent an electronic copy of the procedural
safeguards notice (e.g., through email) instead of a paper copy, if the parent has
previously agreed, or agrees to receive an electronic copy during the pandemic. See
34 C.F.R. § 300.505. The public agency must provide the parents a copy of the
procedural safeguards available to the parents of a child with a disability only one time
a school year, except that the notice also must be provided to parents in the
circumstances specified in 34 C.F.R. § 300.504(a). The public agency is not required to
provide a parent an electronic or paper copy of the notice of procedural safeguards if
the parent declines a copy upon being offered a copy. The public agency should
document that it offered the parent a copy and that the parent declined.

3

Access to Education Records
Q5.

How can a public agency comply with a parent’s request to inspect and review
the child’s education records 2 while school buildings and other public facilities
are closed due to the pandemic?

In light of the social distancing and physical contact restrictions of many jurisdictions
during the pandemic, parents and public agencies may identify a mutually agreeable
timeframe and method to provide access to the child’s education records. If the
parent asks to inspect and review specific documents from the child’s education
records while school buildings are closed during the pandemic, the school and parent
should work together to identify mutually agreeable options for access to the
education records. For example, the school could provide the parent with the
requested information from the child’s records via email, a secure on-line portal or
postal mail until school reopens. Note though, the public agency must use reasonable
methods when transmitting PII in education records through email or an online portal. 3
See FERPA and Virtual Learning During COVID-19.

2 The IDEA provisions related to access rights require that a participating agency comply with a

parent’s request to inspect and review their child’s education records without unnecessary
delay, before any meeting regarding an Individualized education program, or any due process
hearing or a resolution session, and in no case more than 45 days after the request has been
made. 34 C.F.R. § 300.613. Under FERPA and its implementing regulations, the educational
agency or institution must comply with a request for access to records within a reasonable
period of time, but not more than 45 days after it has received the request. 34 C.F.R. § 99.10.
3 Also see, OSEP Letter to Breton (March 21, 2014)

4


UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
OFFICE OF SPECIAL EDUCATION AND REHABILITATIVE SERVICES
OFFICE OF SPECIAL EDUCATION PROGRAMS

June 30, 2020
The Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP), within the U.S. Department of
Education’s (Department) Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services,
issues this Question and Answer (Q & A) document in response to inquiries concerning
implementation of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) Part C
procedural safeguards in the current COVID-19 environment.
This Q & A document does not impose any additional requirements beyond those
included in applicable law and regulations. It does not create or confer any rights for or
on any person. The responses presented in this document generally constitute informal
guidance representing the interpretation of the Department of the applicable statutory
or regulatory requirements in the context of the specific facts presented here and are
not legally binding and does not establish a policy or rule that would apply in all
circumstances.
To review other Q & A documents that OSEP has provided related to COVID-19, please
visit https://sites.ed.gov/idea/topic-areas/#COVID-19. Additional information specific to
the COVID-19 pandemic may be found online at https://www.ed.gov/coronavirus.

IDEA PART C PROCEDURAL SAFEGUARDS
Parental Consent
Q1.

May a State Lead Agency (State LA) or early intervention service (EIS) provider
accept an electronic or digital signature to indicate that the parent provides
consent under Part C of the IDEA (when required for screening if a State has
opted to offer screening, the evaluation, assessment, provision of early
intervention services, disclosure of personally identifiable information (PII), or the
use of benefits or insurance for their infant or toddler)?

Yes, so long as the State LA or EIS provider ensures there are appropriate safeguards for
the parental consent required under Part C of IDEA under 34 C.F.R. § 303.7. The lead
agency may, but is not required to, accept an electronic or digital signature provided it
adopts the appropriate safeguards. OSEP has previously advised that these safeguards
include that the electronic signature:
1) is signed and dated;
2) identifies and authenticates a particular person as the source of the electronic
consent;

400 MARYLAND AVE. S.W., WASHINGTON, DC 20202-2800
www.ed.gov
The Department of Education’s mission is to promote student achievement and preparation for global competitiveness
by fostering educational excellence and ensuring equal access.

3) indicates such person’s approval of the information contained in the electronic
consent; and
4) is accompanied by a statement that the person understands and agrees. 1
IDEA requires State LAs and EIS providers to obtain informed written consent from
parents, consistent with 34 C.F.R. § 303.7 for their child’s screening (in States that have
adopted screening procedures), evaluations and assessments, and before the provision
of early intervention services, including before the initiation of each early intervention
service. Parental consent is also required before the disclosure of PII under certain
circumstances in accordance with 34 C.F.R. § 303.414 or prior to the use of public
benefits or insurance or private insurance in certain circumstances in accordance with
34 C.F.R. § 303.520 and 34 C.F.R. § 303.420(a)(1)-(4) Because of social distancing and
other restrictions during the pandemic, it may not be possible to obtain a parent’s
signed, written consent in-person.
Q2.

May the State LA or EIS provider accept a parent’s electronic or digital signature
as written parental consent to disclose PII from the child’s early intervention
records?

Yes, so long as the safeguards described in Q1 above are applied and met. These
safeguards include that the electronic signature:
1) is signed and dated;
2) identifies and authenticates a particular person as the source of the electronic
consent;
3) indicates such person’s approval of the information contained in the electronic
consent; and
4) is accompanied by a statement that the person understands and agrees.
Parental consent must be obtained before PII is disclosed to parties other than
authorized representatives, officials, or employees of participating agencies (which
includes the State LA and EIS provider) unless a specific exception applies under
34 C.F.R. § 303.414(b) of the IDEA Part C regulations, which incorporates the exceptions
under the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) regulations in
34 C.F.R. Part 99.31. 2

1

34 C.F.R. 303.7; also see OSEP Letter to Greer (July 19, 2013)

For further information regarding consent for disclosure of PII, see Understanding the
Confidentiality Requirements Applicable to IDEA Early Childhood Programs Frequently Asked
Questions (October 2016).
2

2

Prior Written Notice and Procedural Safeguards Notice
Q3.

How can a State LA or EIS provider provide the prior written notice required under
34 C.F.R. § 303.421, while agencies and other facilities are closed due to the
pandemic?

If the parent has previously agreed, or agrees during the pandemic, the prior written
notice and procedural safeguards notice can be provided through electronic mail
(email). The State LA or EIS provider must provide parents written notice a reasonable
time before it proposes or refuses to initiate or change the identification, evaluation, or
placement of their infant or toddler, or the provision of early intervention services to the
infant or toddler with a disability and his or her family. 34 C.F.R § 303.421. The prior
written notice must include information regarding all procedural safeguards that are
available under Part C. 34 C.F.R. § 303.421.
The term “reasonable time” is not defined in the regulation. The Department believes
that it would be appropriate to consider factors such as the closure of agencies and
public facilities such as schools, social distancing, and other health-related orders
during the pandemic in determining what constitutes a reasonable time for this
purpose. Nevertheless, the State LA or EIS provider should make every effort to ensure
that written notice is provided as soon as possible prior to the proposed or refused
action.
The determination of when prior written notice is required will depend on the particular
facts and circumstances, but OSEP encourages State LAs and EIS providers to ensure
that parents are fully informed of how their infant’s or toddler’s early intervention service
needs are addressed during the time that IDEA Part C services are provided remotely.
Access to Early Intervention Records
Q4.

How can a State LA or EIS provider comply with a parent’s request to inspect and
review the infant’s or toddler’s early intervention records 3 while agencies and
other public facilities are closed due to the pandemic?

In light of the social distancing and physical contact restrictions of many jurisdictions
during the pandemic, parents and State LAs and EIS providers may identify a mutually
agreeable timeframe and method for providing access to the infant’s or toddler’s early
intervention records. If the parent asks to inspect and review specific documents from
the infant’s or toddler’s early intervention records while agencies and public facilities

3 Each participating agency must permit parents of a child referred to, or served under Part C, to

inspect and review all early intervention records relating to their child and family. Under IDEA,
the agency must comply with a request without unnecessary delay, and before any
individualized family service plan (IFSP) team meeting, or a due process hearing, or a resolution
session (if the Lead Agency has adopted Part B due process hearing procedures) and, in no
case more than 10 days after the request has been made. 34 C.F.R. § 303.405.

3

are closed during the pandemic, State LA staff, EIS providers, and the parent should
work together to identify mutually agreeable options to provide access to the early
intervention records. For example, the State LA or EIS provider could provide the parent
with the requested information from the infant’s or toddler’s records via email, a secure
on-line portal, or postal mail until the State LA or EIS provider offices reopen. Note
though, the State LA or EIS provider must use reasonable methods when transmitting PII
in early intervention records through email or an on-line portal. See, FERPA and Virtual
Learning During COVID-19.

4


UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
OFFICE OF SPECIAL EDUCATION AND REHABILITATIVE SERVICES
OFFICE OF SPECIAL EDUCATION PROGRAMS

June 26, 2020
The Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP), within the U.S. Department of
Education’s (Department) Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services,
issues this Question and Answer (Q & A) document in response to inquiries concerning
flexibility in the implementation of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA)
Part B fiscal requirements in the current COVID-19 environment.
This Q & A document does not impose any additional requirements beyond those
included in applicable law and regulations. It does not create or confer any rights for or
on any person. The responses presented in this document generally constitute informal
guidance representing the interpretation of the Department of the applicable statutory
or regulatory requirements in the context of the specific facts presented here and are
not legally binding and does not establish a policy or rule that would apply in all
circumstances.
To review other Q & A documents that OSEP has provided related to COVID-19, please
visit https://sites.ed.gov/idea/topic-areas/#COVID-19. Additional information specific to
the COVID-19 pandemic may be found online at https://www.ed.gov/coronavirus.

FLEXIBILITY ON IDEA PART B FISCAL REQUIREMENTS
Q1.

In light of the COVID-19 pandemic, we are anticipating that State revenues will be
reduced and that there may be budget cuts in education generally, and special
education specifically. Is there any flexibility in meeting the requirements for the
maintenance of State financial support (MFS)?

Yes. As you know, under 34 C.F.R. § 300.163(a), a State must not reduce the amount of
State financial support for special education and related services for children with
disabilities, or otherwise made available because of the excess costs of educating
those children, below the amount of that support for the preceding fiscal year.
However, under 34 C.F.R. § 300.163(c), the Secretary may waive the MFS requirement
for a State, for one fiscal year at a time, if the Secretary determines that –
1) Granting a waiver would be equitable due to exceptional or
uncontrollable circumstances such as a natural disaster or a precipitous
and unforeseen decline in the financial resources of the State; or
2) The State meets the standard in 34 C.F.R. § 300.164 for a waiver of the
requirement to supplement, and not to supplant, funds received under
Part B of IDEA.
400 MARYLAND AVE. S.W., WASHINGTON, DC 20202-2800
www.ed.gov
The Department of Education’s mission is to promote student achievement and preparation for global competitiveness
by fostering educational excellence and ensuring equal access.

Additional information about MFS waivers is posted on
https://www2.ed.gov/policy/speced/guid/idea/monitor/smfs-partbwaivers.html.
In addition, States may establish compliance with the MFS requirement on a total or a
per capita basis, and may switch between the two methods, but must establish
compliance by applying the same method to the relevant comparison years (i.e.,
States establish compliance in a given year by showing that either:
1) the total dollar amount was at least equal to the total dollar amount of the
previous year, OR
2) the per capita amount was at least equal to the per capita amount of the
previous year).
Q2.

Disruptions to services and school closures related to the COVID-19 pandemic have
had a significant impact on the funds our local educational agencies (LEAs) have
expended on the education of children with disabilities and may impact the amount
they can budget for the upcoming year. Is there any flexibility in how LEAs meet the
maintenance of effort (MOE) requirements?

Yes. LEAs may meet the MOE eligibility and compliance standards by using any of the
following four methods:
1) total amount of State and local funds;
2) State and local funds on a per capita basis;
3) total amount of local funds only; or
4) local funds only on a per capita basis. See 34 C.F.R. § 300.203(a)(1) and (b)(2).
The local funds only method, on either a total or a per capita basis, is an option
LEAs may want to consider using to meet the MOE requirement if State funds
available for the education of children with disabilities are reduced. 1
•

Under 34 C.F.R. § 300.204, there are five allowable exceptions to the LEA MOE
requirement. An LEA may reduce the level of expenditures for the education of
children with disabilities below the level of those expenditures for the preceding
fiscal year (for the compliance standard) and below the level of those
expenditures for the most recent fiscal year for which information is available (for
the eligibility standard), if the reduction is attributable to any of the following:
a) The voluntary departure, by retirement or otherwise, or departure for just
cause, of special education or related services personnel.

1 More information on LEA MOE is available in Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP)

Memorandum 15-10, Issuance of Guidance on the Final LEA MOE Regulations under Part B of the
IDEA (July 27, 2015).
2

b) A decrease in the enrollment of children with disabilities.
c) The termination of the obligation of the agency, consistent with Part B of
IDEA, to provide a program of special education to a particular child with
a disability that is an exceptionally costly program, as determined by the
State educational agency (SEA), because the child (1) has left the
jurisdiction of the agency; (2) has reached the age at which the agency’s
obligation to provide a free appropriate public education to the child has
terminated; or (3) no longer needs the program of special education.
d) The termination of costly expenditures for long-term purchases, such as
the acquisition of equipment or the construction of school facilities.
e) The assumption of cost by the high cost fund operated by the SEA under
34 C.F.R. § 300.704(c).
•

In addition, under 34 C.F.R. § 300.205, for any fiscal year for which an LEA’s IDEA
section 611 allocation exceeds the amount the LEA received for the previous
fiscal year, the LEA may reduce the level of expenditures for the education of
children with disabilities otherwise required by 34 C.F.R. § 300.203(b) by not more
than 50 percent of the amount of that excess. However, the maximum amount
of expenditures the LEA may reduce under 34 C.F.R. § 300.205 is affected by the
amount of funds expended by the LEA for coordinated early intervening services
under 34 C.F.R. § 300.226. See 34 C.F.R. §§ 300.205(d) and 300.226(a); and
Appendix D to 34 C.F.R. Part 300.

Finally, if an LEA fails to meet the MOE compliance standard, the SEA is liable in a
recovery action under section 452 of the General Education Provisions Act
(20 U.S.C. 1234a) to return to the Department, using non-Federal funds, an amount
equal to the amount by which the LEA failed to maintain its level of expenditures in that
fiscal year, or the amount of the LEA’s IDEA Part B subgrant in that fiscal year, whichever
is lower. 34 C.F.R. § 300.203(d). To the extent permitted under State law, the SEA may
seek reimbursement of this amount from the LEA that did not meet the MOE
compliance standard. Whether a State seeks recovery from an LEA is at the discretion
of the State.
Q3.

Because of the potential budget cuts and school closures during the COVID-19
pandemic, our LEAs are concerned they may not meet the excess cost requirement. Is
there any flexibility in meeting this requirement under IDEA?

No. Excess costs means those costs that are in excess of the average annual per pupil
expenditure (APPE) in an LEA during the preceding school year for an elementary
school or secondary school student, as may be appropriate, and that must be
computed in accordance with 34 C.F.R. § 300.16. To meet the excess cost requirement,
an LEA must spend at least the APPE on the education of each student with a disability
– calculated separately at the elementary school level and the secondary school level

3

– before using IDEA Part B funds to pay for the excess costs of providing special
education and related services to students with disabilities. If an LEA expends less funds
on the education of all students (including students with disabilities), and if the APPE is
then reduced, the amount the LEA must expend on students with disabilities to meet
the excess cost requirement would also be reduced. See also 34 C.F.R. § 300.202(b)
and Appendix A to 34 C.F.R. Part 300.

4


DEPARTAMENTO DE EDUCACIÓN DE EE.UU.
OFICINA DE EDUCACIÓN ESPECIAL Y SERVICIOS DE REHABILITACIÓN
OFICINA DE PROGRAMAS DE EDUCACIÓN ESPECIAL

26 de junio de 2020
La Oficina de Programas de Educación Especial (Office of Special Education Programs,
OSEP), que pertenece a la Oficina de Educación Especial y Servicios de Rehabilitación
del Departamento de Educación de EE. UU. (Departamento), emite este documento
de Preguntas y Respuestas (Questions and Answers, Q & A) en respuesta a consultas
relacionadas con la flexibilidad en la implementación de los requisitos fiscales de la
Parte B de la Ley de Educación para Personas con Discapacidades (Individuals with
Disabilities Education Act, IDEA) en el entorno actual de la COVID-19.
Este documento de Preguntas y Respuestas no impone ningún requisito adicional más
allá de los incluidos en las leyes y regulaciones aplicables. No crea ni confiere ningún
derecho a ninguna persona. Las respuestas presentadas en este documento
constituyen, en general, una guía informal que representa la interpretación del
Departamento de los requisitos legales o reglamentarios aplicables en el contexto de
los hechos específicos presentados aquí y no son legalmente vinculantes ni establecen
una política o regla que pudiera aplicarse en todas las circunstancias.
Para revisar otros documentos de preguntas y respuestas ofrecidos por la OSEP en
relación con la COVID-19, visite https://sites.ed.gov/idea/topic-areas/#COVID-19.
Puede encontrar información adicional específica sobre la pandemia de COVID-19 en
el sitio web https://www.ed.gov/coronavirus.

Flexibilidad en los requisitos fiscales de la Parte B de la Ley IDEA
P1.

Considerando la pandemia de COVID-19, anticipamos que los ingresos del
Estado se reducirán y que puede haber recortes presupuestarios en la
educación en general y en la educación especial en particular. ¿Existe
flexibilidad para el cumplimiento de los requisitos que permiten el
mantenimiento del apoyo financiero del Estado (MFS)?

Sí. Como ya sabe, en virtud del Título 34 § 300.163(a) del CFR, un Estado no debe
reducir la cantidad de apoyo financiero estatal destinado a la educación especial y
los servicios relacionados para estudiantes con discapacidades, o que esté disponible
de otro modo debido a los costos en exceso de la educación de esos niños, por
debajo del monto de esa ayuda para el año fiscal anterior. Sin embargo, en virtud del
Título 34 § 300.163(c) del CFR, el Secretario puede anular el requisito de mantenimiento
de apoyo financiero del estado (Maintenance of State Financial Support, MFS) para un
Estado, por un año fiscal a la vez, si determina que:
400 MARYLAND AVE. S.W., WASHINGTON, DC 20202-2800
www.ed.gov
El Departamento de Educación tiene como misión promover el alto rendimiento académico y la preparación de los estudiantes para la competitividad global
al fomentar la excelencia en la educación y garantizar la igualdad de acceso.

1) Otorgar una exención sería equitativo debido a circunstancias excepcionales o
incontrolables, como un desastre natural o una disminución precipitada e
imprevista de los recursos financieros del Estado; o
2) El Estado cumple con el estándar del Título 34 § 300.164 del CFR para la
anulación del requisito de complementar, y no suplantar, los fondos recibidos
conforme a la Parte B de la Ley IDEA.
Se ha publicado información adicional sobre las exenciones de MFS en
https://www2.ed.gov/policy/speced/guid/idea/monitor/smfs-partb-waivers.html.
Además, los Estados pueden establecer el cumplimiento del requisito de MFS sobre
una base total o per cápita, y pueden cambiar entre los dos métodos, pero deben
establecer el cumplimiento aplicando el mismo método a los años de comparación
relevantes (es decir, los Estados establecen el cumplimiento en un año dado al
demostrar que:
1) el monto total en dólares fue al menos igual al monto total en dólares del año
anterior, O
2) el monto per cápita era al menos igual al monto per cápita del año anterior).
P2.

Las interrupciones en los servicios y el cierre de escuelas relacionados con la
pandemia de COVID-19 han tenido un impacto significativo en los fondos que
nuestras agencias educativas locales (LEA) han gastado en la educación de
niños con discapacidades y pueden afectar la cantidad que pueden
presupuestar para el próximo año. ¿Existe alguna flexibilidad en la forma en que
las LEA cumplen con los requisitos de mantenimiento del esfuerzo (MOE)?

Sí. Las agencias educativas locales (Local educational agencies, LEA) pueden cumplir
con los estándares de elegibilidad y cumplimiento de MOE utilizando cualquiera de los
siguientes cuatro métodos:
1) cantidad total de fondos estatales y locales;
2) fondos estatales y locales sobre una base per cápita;
3) cantidad total de fondos locales solamente; o
4) fondos locales solo sobre una base per cápita. Consulte el Título
34 § 300.203(a)(1) y (b)(2) del CFR. El método de solo fondos locales, ya sea en
forma total o per cápita, es una opción que las LEA pueden considerar usar
para cumplir con el requisito de MOE si se reducen los fondos estatales
disponibles para la educación de niños con discapacidades. 1
1

Obtenga más información sobre el MOE de las LEA en el Memorando 15-10 de la Oficina de
Programas de Educación Especial (OSEP), (Publicación de pautas sobre las regulaciones
finales de MOE de las LEA conforme a la Parte B de la Ley IDEA (27 de julio de 2015).

2

•

Según el Título 34 § 300.204 del CFR, existen cinco excepciones permitidas al
requisito de MOE para las LEA. Una LEA puede reducir el nivel de gastos para
la educación de niños con discapacidades por debajo del nivel de esos
gastos del año fiscal anterior (para el estándar de cumplimiento) y por
debajo del nivel de esos gastos del año fiscal más reciente para el cual hay
información disponible (para el estándar de elegibilidad), si la reducción es
atribuible a cualquiera de los siguientes motivos:
a) La salida voluntaria, por jubilación o de otro modo, o por justa causa, del
personal de educación especial o servicios relacionados.
b) Una disminución de la inscripción de niños con discapacidad.
c) La terminación de la obligación de la agencia, de conformidad con la
Parte B de la Ley IDEA, de proporcionar un programa de educación
especial a un niño en particular con una discapacidad que es un
programa excepcionalmente costoso, según lo determine la agencia
educativa estatal (State Educational Agency, SEA), porque el niño (1) ha
dejado la jurisdicción de la agencia; (2) ha llegado a la edad en la que
ha terminado la obligación de la agencia de proporcionar una
educación pública gratuita y apropiada al niño; o (3) el niño ya no
necesita el programa de educación especial.
d) La terminación de gastos costosos para compras a largo plazo, como la
adquisición de equipos o la construcción de instalaciones escolares.
e) La asunción del costo por parte del fondo de alto costo operado por la
SEA conforme al Título 34 § 300.704(c) del CFR.

•

Además, según el Título 34 § 300.205 del CFR, para cualquier año fiscal en el
que la asignación de la Sección 611 de la Ley IDEA de una LEA exceda la
cantidad que la LEA recibió para el año fiscal anterior, la LEA puede reducir
el nivel de gastos para la educación de niños con discapacidades que de
otro modo exige el Título 34 § 300.203(b) del CFR por no más del 50 % de la
cantidad de ese excedente. Sin embargo, la cantidad máxima de gastos
que la LEA puede reducir en virtud del Título 34 § 300.205 del CFR se ve
afectada por la cantidad de fondos gastados por la LEA para servicios
coordinados de intervención temprana en virtud del Título 34 § 300.226 del
CFR. Consulte el Título 34 §§ 300.205(d) y 300.226(a) del CFR; y el Apéndice D
del Título 34 del CFR Parte 300.

Por último, si una LEA no cumple con el estándar de cumplimiento de MOE, la SEA es
responsable en una acción de recuperación según la Sección 452 de la Ley de
Disposiciones Generales de Educación (General Education Provisions) (Título 20 1234a
del Código de EE.UU. de devolver al Departamento, utilizando fondos no federales, un

3

monto igual al monto por el cual la LEA no pudo mantener su nivel de gastos en ese
año fiscal, o el monto de la subvención secundaria en virtud de la Parte B de la Ley
IDEA en ese año fiscal, el monto que sea menor. Título 34 § 300.203(d) del CFR. En la
medida en que lo permita la ley estatal, la SEA puede solicitar el reembolso de este
monto a la LEA que no cumplió con el estándar de cumplimiento de MOE. Queda a
discreción del Estado intentar o no recuperar los fondos de la LEA.
P3.

Debido a los posibles recortes presupuestarios y cierres de escuelas durante la
pandemia de COVID-19, a nuestras LEA les preocupa no cumplir con el requisito
de costos en exceso. ¿Hay alguna flexibilidad para cumplir con este requisito en
virtud de la Ley IDEA?

No. Los costos en exceso son aquellos costos que superan el gasto promedio anual por
alumno (Annual Per Pupil Expenditure, APPE) en una LEA durante el año escolar
anterior para un estudiante de escuela primaria o secundaria, según corresponda, y
que deben calcularse de acuerdo con el Título 34 § 300.16 del CFR. Para cumplir con el
requisito de costos en exceso, una LEA debe gastar al menos el APPE en la educación
de cada estudiante con una discapacidad calculado por separado al nivel de la
escuela primaria y al nivel de la escuela secundaria antes de usar los fondos de la
Parte B de la Ley IDEA para pagar los costos en exceso de proporcionar educación
especial y servicios relacionados a estudiantes con discapacidades. Si una LEA gasta
menos fondos en la educación de todos los estudiantes (incluidos los estudiantes con
discapacidades), y luego se reduce el APPE, también se reduciría la cantidad que la
LEA debe gastar en estudiantes con discapacidades para cumplir con el requisito de
costos en exceso. Consulte también el Título 34 § 300.202(b) del CFR y el Apéndice A
del Título 34 del CFR Parte 300.

4


UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
OFFICE OF SPECIAL EDUCATION AND REHABILITATIVE SERVICES
OFFICE OF SPECIAL EDUCATION PROGRAMS

June 25, 2020
The Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP), within the U.S. Department of
Education’s (Department) Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services
(OSERS), issues this Question and Answer (Q & A) document in response to inquiries
concerning implementation of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) Part
B use of funds in the current COVID-19 environment.
This Q & A document does not impose any additional requirements beyond those
included in applicable law and regulations. It does not create or confer any rights for or
on any person. The responses presented in this document generally constitute informal
guidance representing the interpretation of the Department of the applicable statutory
or regulatory requirements in the context of the specific facts presented here and are
not legally binding and does not establish a policy or rule that would apply in all
circumstances.
To review other Q & A documents that OSEP has provided related to COVID-19, please
visit https://sites.ed.gov/idea/topic-areas/#COVID-19. Additional information specific to
the COVID-19 pandemic may be found online at https://www.ed.gov/coronavirus.

IDEA PART B USE OF FUNDS
Q1.

How can local educational agencies (LEAs) utilize IDEA Part B subgrant funds to
address conditions caused by the COVID-19 pandemic?

IDEA Part B funds may be used only to pay the excess costs of activities that directly
relate to providing, and ensuring the continuity of, special education and related
services to children with disabilities. 1 For example, an LEA may use IDEA Part B funds to
disseminate health and COVID-19 information that is specifically related to children with
disabilities, to develop emergency plans for children with disabilities, or to provide other
information (e.g., guidance on coordination of the provision of services in alternate

1 For guidance on the use of Federal funds to pay for the compensation of employees and for

conference, training and travel related expenses, see
https://www2.ed.gov/documents/coronavirus/factsheet-fiscal-questions.pdf.
400 MARYLAND AVE. S.W., WASHINGTON, DC 20202-2800
www.ed.gov

The Department of Education’s mission is to promote student achievement and preparation for global competitiveness
by fostering educational excellence and ensuring equal access.

locations 2) to parties who may need such information. 3 LEAs may also use IDEA Part B
funds to engage in activities necessary to resume the provision of special education
and related services to children with disabilities.
Under 34 C.F.R. § 300.202(a)(1), IDEA Part B funds provided to LEAs must be expended in
accordance with IDEA. LEAs must also meet the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for
Federal Awards’ (Uniform Guidance) requirements for procurement in
2 C.F.R. §§ 200.318 through 200.326, and maintain appropriate records and cost
documentation as required by 2 C.F.R. § 200.302 (financial management),
2 C.F.R. § 200.333 (retention requirements for records), and 2 C.F.R. § 200.430(i)
(standards for documenting personnel expenses). Further, costs incurred that are
associated with COVID-19 related reasons will be allowable only if they are reasonable,
necessary, and allocable to the grant, consistent with the Federal cost principles
described in the OMB Uniform Guidance (2 C.F.R. §§ 200.403, 200.404, and 200.405),
adequately documented (2 C.F.R. § 200.403(g)), and do not conflict with the
applicable statute and regulations.
Q2.

What options are available to State educational agencies (SEAs) in using IDEA
Part B funds to address additional challenges during the COVID-19 pandemic?

States have considerable flexibility in the use of IDEA Part B funds that they may set
aside for “other State-level activities” under 34 C.F.R. § 300.704(b)(4) 4 that they may find
beneficial during the current COVID-19 crisis. These include: (1) support for the use of
technology to maximize accessibility to the general education curriculum for children
with disabilities, including technology with universal design principles such as software
compatible with screen readers, online tools that make electronic books accessible to
individuals with disabilities, and assistive technology devices such as dedicated
communication devices for non-verbal students with disabilities; and (2) capacity
building activities directed at improving the delivery of services by LEAs to improve
results for children with disabilities (34 C.F.R. § 300.704(b)(4)(iv) and (viii)).

2 See Question and Answer A-5 of the Department’s Questions and Answers on Providing

Services to Children with Disabilities During the COVID-19 Outbreak (March 12, 2020).

3 Parties who may need such information include school staff responsible for implementing

individualized education programs (IEPs), parents of eligible children, and staff in alternate
locations where special education and related services (e.g., occupational therapy, physical
therapy, or speech-language pathology services) may be provided.

4 States may use a portion of the IDEA section 611 funds they reserve under
34 C.F.R. § 300.704(b)(1) for other State-level activities to carry out any of the authorized
activities enumerated in 34 C.F.R. § 300.704(b)(4).

2

Under these authorized activities, SEAs may elect to build the capacity of LEAs to ensure
that students with disabilities have equal access to the same opportunities available to
their nondisabled peers, including remote learning.
IDEA Part B funds may also be used to provide special education and related services,
as well as supplementary aids and services (such as training or assistive technology),
provided in the regular or remote learning setting to a child with a disability in
accordance with the child’s IEP, even if one or more nondisabled students benefit from
those services. 5
When expending IDEA Part B funds to procure property (such as equipment and other
assets, including technological devices) and services (including potentially training on
the use of remote learning platforms, or best practices for remote learning), SEAs must
follow the same policies and procedures they use for procurements from their nonFederal funds, consistent with 2 C.F.R. § 200.317. SEAs must use, manage, and dispose of
equipment in accordance with State laws and procedures, consistent with
2 C.F.R. § 200.313(b). See also Q3 below. In addition, SEAs must maintain appropriate
records and cost documentation as required by 2 C.F.R. § 200.302 (financial
management), 2 C.F.R. § 200.333 (retention requirements for records), and
2 C.F.R. § 200.430(i) (standards for documenting personnel expenses). Further, costs
incurred that are associated with COVID-19 related reasons will be allowable only if
they are reasonable, necessary, and allocable to the grant, consistent with the Federal
cost principles described in the OMB Uniform Guidance (2 C.F.R. §§ 200.403, 200.404,
and 200.405) and adequately documented (2 C.F.R. § 200.403(g)), and do not conflict
with the applicable statute and regulations.
Q3.

Are SEAs and LEAs able to use IDEA Part B funds to purchase equipment
necessary to increase their capacity to support remote learning for students with
disabilities?

OSEP acknowledges that, particularly during the COVID-19 pandemic, SEAs and their
LEAs may need to purchase equipment and other assets (such as software, mobile hot
spots, or devices like laptops and tablets6), including related assistive technology, in
order to support increased accessibility to remote learning platforms for students with

5 See IDEA’s permissive use of funds provision in 34 C.F.R. § 300.208(a)(1). It is permissible to use

IDEA Part B funds in such cases where an “incidental benefit” is provided to nondisabled
children as a result of special education and related services provided under IDEA to children
with disabilities. See OSEP’s Aug. 5, 2013, letter to Ms. Bowman.
6 IDEA Part B funds may not be used to purchase equipment that is being provided to all

students, such as laptops distributed to the entire student population of a school to facilitate
remote learning. However, to the extent that students with disabilities require additional
equipment, in addition to what is being provided to all students, in order to access remote
learning, IDEA funds may be used to purchase the equipment to enable that access.

3

disabilities. Under 34 C.F.R. § 300.718(a), if OSEP determines that an IDEA Part B program
will be improved by permitting program funds to be used to acquire appropriate
equipment 7, (such as a dedicated communication device for an individual student
with a disability), OSEP is authorized to allow the use of those funds for those purposes.
Equipment and other assets purchased with IDEA Part B funds may be transferred from
school to home, as needed for use by students with disabilities in remote learning
settings.
If equipment expenditures fall within the scope of the prior approval already provided
under OSERS’ October 29, 2019, Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) on “Prior Approval –
OSEP and RSA Formula Grants,” 8 SEAs are not required to submit prior approval requests
for the equipment. Under that prior approval, grantees do not need to submit prior
approval requests to OSEP for equipment (defined generally as $5,000 or more per item
of equipment) that is to be charged to IDEA funds and which is identified on, or directly
related to the implementation of, IEPs for children and youth with disabilities, including
services such as assistive technology devices listed on the IEP as well as equipment
needed to provide services in accordance with the IEP. However, if an SEA must
purchase equipment that goes beyond the scope of the prior approval provided in the
FAQs, then the SEA must submit a detailed prior approval request to OSEP. OSEP has
streamlined its current approval process to respond to the anticipated increase in
requests. Similarly, under their subrecipient monitoring authority, 9 SEAs may anticipate
additional prior approval requests from their LEAs regarding the use of IDEA Part B funds
for the purchase of equipment, and SEAs may wish to expedite their usual procedures
and practices consistent with any flexibilities afforded by the State during times of
emergency.
Under 34 C.F.R. § 300.202(a)(1), IDEA Part B funds provided to LEAs must be expended in
accordance with IDEA. Further, when expending IDEA Part B funds to procure property
(including equipment and other assets, such as technological devices) and services
(including training on the use of remote learning platforms, or best practices for remote
learning), SEAs must follow the same policies and procedures they use for procurements
from their non-Federal funds, consistent with 2 C.F.R. § 200.317. SEAs must use, manage,
and dispose of equipment in accordance with State laws and procedures, consistent
with 2 C.F.R. § 200.313(b). LEAs must meet the OMB Uniform Guidance requirements for

7 Equipment is defined in the IDEA regulations at 34 C.F.R. § 300.14. Equipment is further defined

in the OMB Uniform Guidance at 2 C.F.R. § 200.33.

8 Available at https://www2.ed.gov/policy/speced/guid/faq-prior-approval-10-29-2019.pdf.
9 Under the OMB Uniform Guidance requirements in 2 C.F.R. § 200.439(b)(1)–(3), SEAs have the

authority, as the pass-through entity, to review and approve LEAs’ requests to use IDEA Part B
funds for the purchase of equipment, using the same criteria described in FAQ 12 of OSERS’
October 29, 2019, FAQs on “Prior Approval – OSEP and RSA Formula Grants.”

4

procurement in 2 C.F.R. §§ 200.318 through 200.326, and for equipment in
2 C.F.R. §§ 200.313(c)-(e) and 200.439. Both SEAs and LEAs must also maintain
appropriate records and cost documentation as required by 2 C.F.R. § 200.302
(financial management), 2 C.F.R. § 200.333 (retention requirements for records), and
2 C.F.R. § 200.430(i) (standards for documenting personnel expenses). Further, costs
incurred that are associated with COVID-19 related reasons will be allowable only if
they are reasonable, necessary, and allocable to the grant, consistent with the Federal
cost principles described in the OMB Uniform Guidance (2 C.F.R. §§ 200.403, 200.404,
and 200.405) and adequately documented (2 C.F.R. § 200.403(g)), and do not conflict
with the applicable statute and regulations.

5


UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
OFFICE OF SPECIAL EDUCATION AND REHABILITATIVE SERVICES
OFFICE OF SPECIAL EDUCATION PROGRAMS

June 25, 2020
The Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP), within the U.S. Department of
Education’s (Department) Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services
(OSERS), issues this Question and Answer (Q & A) document in response to inquiries
concerning implementation of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) Part
C use of funds in the current COVID-19 environment.
This Q & A document does not impose any additional requirements beyond those
included in applicable law and regulations. It does not create or confer any rights for or
on any person. The responses presented in this document generally constitute informal
guidance representing the interpretation of the Department of the applicable statutory
or regulatory requirements in the context of the specific facts presented here and are
not legally binding and does not establish a policy or rule that would apply in all
circumstances.
To review other Q & A documents that OSEP has provided related to COVID-19, please
visit https://sites.ed.gov/idea/topic-areas/#COVID-19. Additional information specific to
the COVID-19 pandemic may be found online at https://www.ed.gov/coronavirus.

IDEA PART C USE OF FUNDS
Q1.

What activities can be funded using IDEA Part C to address conditions caused by
the COVID-19 pandemic?

Under 34 C.F.R. § 303.501, the State lead agency (State LA) and early intervention
service (EIS) provider may use IDEA Part C funds for activities or expenses that are
reasonable and necessary to implement the State’s early intervention program for
infants and toddlers with disabilities including―
a) For direct early intervention services for infants and toddlers with disabilities and
their families under this part that are not otherwise funded through other public
or private sources (subject to 34 C.F.R. §§303.510 through 303.521);
b) To expand and improve services for infants and toddlers with disabilities and their
families under this part that are otherwise available.
Additionally, IDEA Part C funds may be used for activities that directly relate to
providing, and ensuring the continuity of, Part C services to eligible children and their
families as well as activities that support the Statewide early intervention program
including child find, public awareness, referral and evaluation, conducting child and
400 MARYLAND AVE. S.W., WASHINGTON, DC 20202-2800
www.ed.gov
The Department of Education’s mission is to promote student achievement and preparation for global competitiveness
by fostering educational excellence and ensuring equal access.

family assessments through alternative ways, developing and disseminating information
on alternative communications and service delivery options, use of videoconferencing
specific to communicating and delivering, early intervention services. The State LA and
EIS program and provider may also use IDEA Part C funds to disseminate health and
COVID-19 information to, and respond to information requests from relevant parties,
develop emergency plans to support the provision and continuity of Part C services, or
provide other information (e.g., how the State LA staff or EIS programs or providers may
provide services in different formats or locations as described in Question B-2 of the
document titled Questions and Answers on Providing Services to Children with
Disabilities During the COVID-19 Outbreak (March 12, 2020) to relevant parties who
need this information).
Relevant parties may include parents of children referred to or served by IDEA Part C,
EIS programs and providers, childcare centers, staff in other locations where early
intervention services are provided, early and regular Head Start and preschool
programs, hospitals, and primary referral sources such as physicians, shelters, foster care
programs, etc. Other activities that relate to service provision, including the provision of
service coordination, evaluations, and assessments, may also continue to be funded.
When expending Part C funds, State LAs must follow the same policies and procedures
they use when expending and accounting for their non Federal funds, consistent with
the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Uniform Administrative Requirements,
Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards (Uniform Guidance) under
2 C.F.R. §§ 200.302(a) and 200.317.
Q2.

Can State LAs and EIS providers use IDEA Part C funds to ensure the continuity of
early intervention services through telecommunications or other methods during
the COVID-19 pandemic?

Yes, in order to ensure the continuity of service coordination and early intervention
services to infants and toddlers with disabilities and their families, State LAs and EIS
providers may use IDEA Part C funds to provide early intervention services and service
coordination services by initiating or expanding the use of telecommunications (e.g.
telephone, video conferencing, or other methods). 1 The provision of services by
alternate means during the COVID-19 pandemic does not mean that all early
intervention services must be provided in this manner once a service can be provided
in person when feasible, safe, and appropriate to do so and in-person service delivery is

1 Use of telecommunications technology as a mechanism to provide service coordination and

early intervention services, including home visits for infants and toddlers with disabilities and their
families are sometimes referred to as: telehealth, tele-intervention, tele-therapy, and telepractice.
2

acceptable to the child’s family. IDEA Part C funds can be used to support activities
during the transition to in-person services.
Q3.

What are other ways that State LAs and EIS providers can ensure continuity of
services using IDEA Part C funds during the COVID-19 pandemic?

State LAs may use IDEA Part C funds for interim payments pending reimbursement from
the agency or entity that has ultimate responsibility for the payment consistent with
IDEA Part C payor of last resort requirements under 34 C.F.R. § 303.510(b) to prevent a
delay in the timely provision of appropriate early intervention services.
This may be necessary as many States use a variety of funding sources for early
intervention services, including public insurance and benefits and private insurance
and the authorities (laws, regulations, State Medicaid plans, etc.) and billing systems
around these funding sources are being revised to allow for payment for
telecommunications as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic.
Q4.

How are State LAs able to use IDEA Part C funds to increase their capacity to
provide early intervention services remotely including by purchasing
equipment?

During the COVID-19 pandemic, State LAs and local EIS providers and programs may
need to purchase equipment and related assistive technology to continue the
provision of appropriate early intervention services (including service coordination) for
eligible infants and toddlers with disabilities and their families.
If those related equipment expenditures fall within the scope of the prior approval
provided in OSERS’s October 29, 2019, Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) on Prior
Approval for OSEP and RSA Formula Grants, State LAs are not required to submit prior
approval requests for the equipment (defined generally as $5,000 or more per item of
equipment). Under that prior approval FAQ document, grantees no longer need to
submit prior approval requests under 34 C.F.R. § 303.104(a) to OSEP for equipment that
is to be charged to IDEA funds and which is identified on, or directly related to the
implementation of, Individualized Family Service Plans (IFSPs) assistive technology
devices and other equipment needed to provide services on the IFSP.
However, if a State LA must purchase equipment that is not identified on or needed to
implement the IFSP, then the State LA must submit a detailed prior approval request to
OSEP and may submit that request electronically.
In reviewing requests for prior approval under 34 C.F.R. § 303.104(a), if OSEP determines
that an IDEA Part C program will be improved by permitting IDEA Part C funds to be
used to acquire the equipment, OSEP is authorized to allow the use of IDEA Part C funds
for those purposes.
OSEP has streamlined its current approval process to respond to the anticipated
increase in requests. When expending IDEA Part C funds, State LAs must follow the same

3

policies and procedures they use for procurements from their non-Federal funds,
consistent with the OMB Uniform Guidance for procurement under 2 C.F.R. § 200.317. 2

In addition, State LAs must use, manage, and dispose of equipment in accordance with State
laws and procedures, consistent with 2 C.F.R. § 200.313(b) and maintain appropriate records
and cost documentation as required by 2 C.F.R. § 200.302 (financial management),
2 C.F.R. § 200.333 (retention requirements for records), and 2 C.F.R. § 200.430(i) (standards for
documenting personnel expenses). Further, costs incurred that are associated with the COVID19 pandemic will be allowable only if they are reasonable, necessary, and allocable to the
grant, consistent with the Federal cost principles described in the OMB Uniform Guidance
(2 C.F.R. §§ 200.403, 200.404, and 200.405), adequately documented (2 C.F.R. § 200.403(g)), and
are consistent with the IDEA use of funds do not conflict with the applicable statutory and
regulatory provisions. For guidance on the use of Federal funds to pay for the compensation of
employees and for conference, training and travel related expenses, see Fact Sheet: Select
Questions Related to Use of Department of Education Grant Funds during the Novel Coronavirus
Disease 2019
2

4


UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
OFFICE OF SPECIAL EDUCATION AND REHABILITATIVE SERVICES
OFFICE OF SPECIAL EDUCATION PROGRAMS

June 22, 2020
The Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP), within the U.S. Department of
Education’s (Department) Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services,
issues this Question and Answer (Q & A) document in response to inquiries concerning
implementation of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) Part C dispute
resolution procedures in the current COVID-19 environment.
This Q & A document does not impose any additional requirements beyond those
included in applicable law and regulations. It does not create or confer any rights for or
on any person. The responses presented in this document generally constitute informal
guidance representing the interpretation of the Department of the applicable statutory
or regulatory requirements in the context of the specific facts presented here and are
not legally binding and does not establish a policy or rule that would apply in all
circumstances.
To review other Q & A documents that OSEP has provided related to COVID-19, please
visit https://sites.ed.gov/idea/topic-areas/#COVID-19. Additional information specific to
the COVID-19 pandemic may be found online at https://www.ed.gov/coronavirus.

IDEA PART C DISPUTE RESOLUTION PROCEDURES
Q1.

How can parents, State lead agencies (State LAs), and early intervention service
(EIS) providers resolve disagreements regarding IDEA Part C early intervention
matters due to conditions related to the public health response to the
pandemic?

OSEP encourages parents, State LAs, and EIS providers to work collaboratively, in the
best interest of infants and toddlers with disabilities, to resolve disagreements that may
occur when working to provide positive early intervention experiences. In its March 2020
Questions and Answers on Providing Services to Children with Disabilities During the
Coronavirus Disease 2019 Outbreak, the Department addressed the provision of early
intervention services during the pandemic. We recognize that, during this national
emergency, State LAs and EIS providers may not be able to provide all services in the
same manner they are typically provided, and encourage parents, service providers,
and administrators to collaborate creatively to continue to the meet the needs of
infants and toddlers with disabilities and their families. Timely communication between
parents, State LA staff, and EIS providers can often help resolve disagreements that may
arise regarding the early intervention services provided during the pandemic. However,
when those informal efforts prove unsuccessful, IDEA’s three dispute resolution
400 MARYLAND AVE. S.W., WASHINGTON, DC 20202-2800
www.ed.gov
The Department of Education’s mission is to promote student achievement and preparation for global competitiveness
by fostering educational excellence and ensuring equal access.

mechanisms -- mediation, State complaint, and due process complaint procedures -are available.
Q2.

Is a State LA permitted to extend the 60-day time limit for resolving State
complaints 1 due to circumstances related to the pandemic?

Yes, but only on a case-by-case basis. Under 34 C.F.R. § 303.433(a), a State’s minimum
State complaint procedures under Part C of IDEA must include a 60-day timeline for
complaint resolution. The regulations specify two allowable reasons for extending the
60-day time limit: (1) if exceptional circumstances exist with respect to a particular
complaint; or (2) if the parent (or individual or organization, if mediation is available to
the individual or organization under State procedures) and the State LA, public agency,
or EIS provider agree to extend the time to engage in mediation pursuant to
34 C.F.R. § 303.433(b)(1).
With regard to the “exceptional circumstances” exception to the 60-day timeline,
States will need to determine on a case-by-case basis whether it is appropriate to
extend the 60-day time limit for a particular complaint due to exceptional
circumstances related to the pandemic or related health and safety restrictions. A
State LA may not categorically determine that it will not undertake complaint
resolutions during the pandemic based solely on its assumption that COVID-19 is an
exceptional circumstance that would warrant an extension of the 60-day complaint
resolution timeline for all complaints.
A State LA may extend the 60-day time limit due to exceptional circumstances such as
a governmentwide shutdown, if the State LA needs additional information under
34 C.F.R. § 303.433(a)(2) and the relevant party(ies) is (are) unavailable due to
hospitalization, or a parent complainant is unavailable due to illness or other
documented reason and cannot provide the additional information under
34 C.F.R. § 303.433(a)(2). See 76 Fed. Reg. 61410, 60215 (Sept. 28, 2011). Although the
Department has previously concluded that unavailability of State LA staff generally is
not an exceptional circumstance that would warrant an extension of the 60-day
complaint resolution timeline, conditions related to the pandemic could be deemed an
exceptional circumstance with respect to a particular complaint if, for example, a large
number of State LA staff are unavailable or absent for an extended period of time as a
result of the pandemic, or where the State LA cannot access specific information from
EIS providers or the child’s early intervention records needed to resolve the complaint
due to conditions related to the pandemic.

1 The requirements for State complaints are in 34 C.F.R. §§ 303.432 through 303.434.

2

Q3.

How can parents, the State LA, and EIS providers use IDEA’s mediation 2
procedures to resolve disputes when agencies and other public facilities are
closed or have restrictions that prevent face-to-face meetings?

IDEA does not contain a specific timeframe in which mediation must occur so long as it
is not used to deny or delay a parent’s right to a due process hearing or to deny any
other rights afforded under Part C. Because mediation is voluntary, the parties have the
flexibility to identify a mutually agreeable time to meet. 34 C.F.R. § 303.431(b)(1).
Where the circumstances related to the pandemic prevent the parent, State LA
representative, or EIS provider from attending mediation in person, there is nothing in
IDEA that would prevent the parties from agreeing to conduct the mediation through
alternative means, such as video conferences or conference calls, if the State’s
procedures do not prohibit mediation from occurring in this manner.
Due Process Hearings 3: When the Lead Agency Has Adopted Part C Due Process Procedures
Q4.

May due process hearings be conducted virtually when agencies and other public
facilities are closed or have restrictions that prevent face-to-face meetings?

Yes. A State LA could permit hearings on due process complaints to be conducted
through video conferences or conference calls, if a hearing officer concludes that such
procedures are consistent with legal practice in the State. A hearing conducted
virtually must ensure a parent’s right to an impartial due process hearing consistent with
all requirements in 34 C.F.R. §§ 303.435 through 300.437.
Q5.

Do hearing officers have the authority to extend the 30-day timeline for issuing
decisions on due process complaints during the pandemic?

Yes. IDEA permits a hearing officer to grant specific extensions of the 30-day timeline at
the request of either party to the hearing. 34 C.F.R. § 303.437(c). There is no IDEA
requirement that both parties agree to the extension request, but the hearing officer
must document the length of the extension and the reason it was provided.

2 The requirements for mediation are in 34 C.F.R. § 303.431.
3 The requirements for States that choose to adopt the Part C due process hearing procedures

are in 34 C.F.R. §§ 303.435 through 303.438.

3

Resolution Process 4 and Due Process Hearings 5: When the Lead Agency Has Adopted Part B
Due Process Procedures
Q6.

Can the parent and EIS provider agree to extend the timelines applicable to the
resolution process given the challenges associated with agency and other public
facility operations during the COVID-19 pandemic?

Yes. There is nothing in IDEA that would prevent the parent and EIS provider from
mutually agreeing to extend the 15-day timeline for the State LA or EIS provider to
convene a resolution meeting and the 30-day resolution period timeline when a parent
files a due process complaint. If the parties are unable to meet in person or through
virtual means (discussed in Q7), they could mutually agree to extend the 15-day
timeline for the resolution meeting and the 30-day resolution period until a face-to-face
meeting could occur.
Q7.

Can the parent and EIS provider agree to hold a resolution meeting virtually,
rather than face-to-face?

Yes. Where the circumstances related to the pandemic prevent the parent or EIS
provider from attending the resolution meeting in person, it would be appropriate for
the State LA to offer to use alternative means, such as video conferences or
conference calls, with its use subject to the parent’s agreement.
Q8.

May due process hearings be conducted virtually when agencies and other
public facilities are closed or have restrictions that prevent face-to-face
meetings?

Yes. A State could permit hearings on due process complaints to be conducted
through video conferences or conference calls, if a hearing officer concludes that such
procedures are consistent with legal practice in the State. 34 C.F.R. § 303.443(c)(1)(iii). A
hearing conducted virtually must ensure a parent’s right to an impartial due process
hearing consistent with all requirements in 34 C.F.R. §§ 303.443 through 303.448.
Q9.

Do hearing officers, or where applicable, reviewing officers, have the authority to
extend the applicable timelines for issuing decisions on due process complaints
during the pandemic?

Yes. IDEA permits a hearing officer or a reviewing officer to grant specific extensions of
timelines at the request of either party to the hearing or review. 34 C.F.R. § 303.447(c);
see 34 C.F.R. § 303.447(a)-(b) for applicable timelines. There is no IDEA requirement that

4 The requirements for the resolution process applicable to States that choose to adopt the Part

B due process hearing procedures are in 34 C.F.R. § 303.442.

5 The requirements for States that choose to adopt the Part B due process hearing procedures

are in 34 C.F.R. §§ 303.440 through 303.448.

4

both parties agree to the extension request, but the hearing officer or reviewing officer
must document the length of the extension and the reason it was provided.

5


DEPARTAMENTO DE EDUCACIÓN DE EE.UU.
OFICINA DE EDUCACIÓN ESPECIAL Y SERVICIOS DE REHABILITACIÓN
OFICINA DE PROGRAMAS DE EDUCACIÓN ESPECIAL

22 de junio de 2020
La Oficina de Programas de Educación Especial (Office of Special Education Programs,
OSEP), que pertenece a la Oficina de Educación Especial y Servicios de Rehabilitación
del Departamento de Educación de EE.UU. (Departamento), emite este documento
de Preguntas y Respuestas (Questions and Answers, Q & A) en respuesta a consultas
relacionadas con la implementación de los procedimientos de resolución de disputas
de la Parte C de la Ley de Educación para Personas con Discapacidades (Individuals
with Disabilities Education Act, IDEA) en el entorno actual de la COVID-19.
Este documento de Preguntas y Respuestas no impone ningún requisito adicional más
allá de los incluidos en las leyes y regulaciones aplicables. No crea ni confiere ningún
derecho a ninguna persona. Las respuestas presentadas en este documento
constituyen, en general, una guía informal que representa la interpretación del
Departamento de los requisitos legales o reglamentarios aplicables en el contexto de
los hechos específicos presentados aquí y no son legalmente vinculantes ni establecen
una política o regla que pudiera aplicarse en todas las circunstancias.
Para revisar otros documentos de preguntas y respuestas ofrecidos por la OSEP en
relación con la COVID-19, visite https://sites.ed.gov/idea/topic-areas/#COVID-19.
Puede encontrar información adicional específica sobre la pandemia de COVID-19 en
el sitio web https://www.ed.gov/coronavirus.

PROCEDIMIENTOS DE RESOLUCIÓN DE DISPUTAS DE LA PARTE C DE LA LEY IDEA
P1.

¿De qué manera los padres, las agencias principales estatales (LA estatales) y
los proveedores de servicios de intervención temprana (EIS) pueden resolver los
desacuerdos con respecto a los asuntos de intervención temprana de la Parte C
de la Ley IDEA provocados por las condiciones relacionadas con la respuesta
de salud pública a la pandemia?

La OSEP alienta a los padres, las agencias principales estatales y los proveedores de
servicios de intervención temprana (early intervention services, EIS) a trabajar en
colaboración, por el bien de los bebés y los niños pequeños con discapacidades, a fin
de resolver los desacuerdos que puedan presentarse al trabajar para proporcionar
experiencias positivas de intervención temprana. En su documento Questions and
Answers on Providing Services to Children with Disabilities During the Coronavirus
Disease 2019 Outbreak (Preguntas y respuestas sobre la prestación de servicios a niños
con discapacidades durante el brote de coronavirus 2019) de marzo de 2020, el
Departamento abordó la prestación de servicios de intervención temprana durante la
400 MARYLAND AVE. S.W., WASHINGTON, DC 20202-2800
www.ed.gov
Tenemos como misión promover el alto rendimiento académico y la preparación de los estudiantes para la competitividad global
al fomentar la excelencia en la educación y garantizar la igualdad de acceso.

pandemia. Reconocemos que, durante esta emergencia nacional, es posible que los
proveedores de EIS y las agencias principales estatales no puedan brindar todos los
servicios de la misma manera en que normalmente se brindan, y alentamos a los
padres, proveedores de servicios y administradores a colaborar de manera creativa
para continuar satisfaciendo las necesidades de bebés y niños pequeños con
discapacidades y sus familias. La comunicación oportuna entre los padres, el personal
de las agencias principales estatales y los proveedores de EIS a menudo puede ayudar
a resolver los desacuerdos que puedan surgir con respecto a los servicios de
intervención temprana prestados durante la pandemia. Sin embargo, cuando esos
esfuerzos informales resultan infructuosos, están disponibles los tres mecanismos de
resolución de disputas de la Ley IDEA: procedimientos de mediación, queja ante el
estado y queja de debido proceso.
P2.

¿Se permite a las agencias principales estatales extender el límite de tiempo de
60 días para resolver quejas ante el estado1 debido a circunstancias
relacionadas con la pandemia?

Sí, pero solo considerando caso por caso. Conforme al Título 34 § 303.433(a) del CFR,
los procedimientos mínimos de queja ante el Estado en virtud de la Parte C de la Ley
IDEA deben incluir un plazo de 60 días para la resolución de la queja. Las regulaciones
especifican dos razones permitidas para extender el límite de tiempo de 60 días: (1) si
existen circunstancias excepcionales con respecto a una queja en particular; o (2) si el
padre (o individuo u organización, si la mediación está disponible para individuos u
organizaciones según los procedimientos estatales) y la agencia principal estatal, la
agencia pública o el proveedor de EIS acuerdan extender el tiempo para participar
en la mediación de conformidad con el Título 34 § 303.433(b)(1) del CFR.
Con respecto a la excepción de "circunstancias excepcionales" para el plazo de 60
días, los Estados deberán determinar caso por caso si es apropiado extender el plazo
de 60 días para una queja en particular debido a circunstancias excepcionales
relacionadas con la pandemia o con restricciones de salud y seguridad relacionadas.
Las agencias principales estatales no pueden determinar categóricamente que no se
encargarán de resoluciones de quejas durante la pandemia basándose únicamente
en su suposición de que la COVID-19 es una circunstancia excepcional que justificaría
una extensión del plazo de resolución de quejas de 60 días para todas las quejas.
Las agencias principales estatales pueden extender el límite de tiempo de 60 días
debido a circunstancias excepcionales, como un cierre de todos los organismos
gubernamentales, si necesitan información adicional en virtud del Título 34 §
303.433(a)(2) del CFR y las partes relevantes no están disponibles debido a una
hospitalización, o un padre denunciante no está disponible debido a una enfermedad
1 Los requisitos para las quejas ante el estado se encuentran en el Título 34 §§ 303.432 a 303.434 del Código

de Regulaciones Federales (Code of Federal Regulations, CFR).

2

u otra razón documentada y no puede proporcionar la información adicional según el
Título 34 § 303.433(a)(2) del CFR. Consulte 76 Fed. Reg. 61410, 60215 (28 de septiembre
de 2011). Si bien el Departamento concluyó anteriormente que la falta de
disponibilidad del personal de una agencia principal estatal generalmente no es una
circunstancia excepcional que justifique una extensión del plazo de resolución de
quejas de 60 días, las condiciones relacionadas con la pandemia podrían considerarse
una circunstancia excepcional con respecto a una queja en particular si, por ejemplo,
una gran cantidad de personal de una agencia principal estatal no está disponible o
está ausente durante un período prolongado como resultado de la pandemia, o si la
agencia principal estatal no puede acceder a información específica de los
proveedores de EIS o los registros de intervención temprana del niño necesarios para
resolver la queja por condiciones relacionadas con la pandemia.
P3.

¿Cómo pueden los padres, la agencia principal estatal y los proveedores de EIS
usar los procedimientos de mediación de la Ley IDEA2 para resolver disputas
cuando las agencias y otras instalaciones públicas están cerradas o tienen
restricciones que impiden las reuniones presenciales?

La Ley IDEA no menciona un marco de tiempo específico en el que debe ocurrir la
mediación siempre que no se use para negar o retrasar el derecho de los padres a
una audiencia de debido proceso o para negar cualquier otro derecho otorgado por
la Parte C. Debido a que la mediación es voluntaria, las partes tienen la flexibilidad
para identificar un momento de mutuo acuerdo para reunirse. Título 34 § 303.431(b)(1)
del CFR.
Cuando las circunstancias relacionadas con la pandemia impidan que los padres, el
representante de la agencia principal estatal o el proveedor de EIS asistan a la
mediación en persona, la Ley IDEA no dice nada que impida que las partes acuerden
llevar a cabo la mediación a través de medios alternativos, como videoconferencias o
conferencias telefónicas, si los procedimientos del Estado no prohíben que la
mediación ocurra de esta manera.
Audiencias de debido proceso3: Cuando la agencia principal ha adoptado los
procedimientos de debido proceso de la Parte C
P4.

¿Pueden las audiencias de debido proceso llevarse a cabo virtualmente
cuando las agencias y otras instalaciones públicas están cerradas o tienen
restricciones que impiden las reuniones presenciales?

Sí. Una agencia principal estatal podría permitir que las audiencias de debido proceso
se lleven a cabo a través de videoconferencias o conferencias telefónicas, si un
2
3

Los requisitos para la mediación se encuentran en el Título 34 § 303.431 del CFR.
Los requisitos para los Estados que optan por adoptar los procedimientos de audiencias de debido
proceso de la Parte C se encuentran en el Título 34 §§ 303.435 a 303.438 del CFR.

3

funcionario de audiencias concluye que dichos procedimientos son consistentes con la
práctica legal en el Estado. Una audiencia realizada virtualmente debe garantizar el
derecho de los padres a una audiencia de debido proceso imparcial de acuerdo con
todos los requisitos del Título 34 §§ 303.435 a 300.437 del CFR.
P5.

¿Tienen los funcionarios de audiencias la autoridad para extender el plazo de 30
días para emitir decisiones sobre quejas de debido proceso durante la
pandemia?

Sí. La Ley IDEA permite que un funcionario de audiencias conceda extensiones
específicas al plazo de 30 días a pedido de cualquiera de las partes de la audiencia.
Título 34 § 303.437(c) del CFR. La Ley IDEA no exige que ambas partes estén de
acuerdo con la solicitud de extensión, pero el funcionario de audiencias debe
documentar la duración de la extensión y el motivo por el que se proporcionó.
Proceso de resolución4 y audiencias de debido proceso5: Cuando la agencia principal
ha adoptado los procedimientos de debido proceso de la Parte B
P6.

¿Pueden los padres y el proveedor de EIS acordar extender los plazos aplicables
al proceso de resolución dados los desafíos asociados con las operaciones de
la agencia y otras instalaciones públicas durante la pandemia de COVID-19?

Sí. La Ley IDEA no dice nada que impida que los padres y el proveedor de EIS
acuerden mutuamente extender el plazo de 15 días para que el proveedor de EIS o la
agencia principal estatal convoquen una reunión de resolución y el plazo del período
de resolución de 30 días cuando los padres presentan una queja de debido proceso. Si
las partes no pueden reunirse en persona o por medios virtuales (analizado en la
pregunta 7), podrían acordar mutuamente extender el plazo de 15 días para la
reunión de resolución y el período de resolución de 30 días hasta que se pueda realizar
una reunión presencial.
P7.

¿Pueden los padres y el proveedor de EIS acordar realizar una reunión de
resolución virtualmente, en lugar de hacerlo de manera presencial?

Sí. Cuando las circunstancias relacionadas con la pandemia impidan que los padres o
el proveedor del EIS asistan a la reunión de resolución en persona, sería apropiado que
la agencia principal estatal ofreciera el uso de medios alternativos, como
videoconferencias o conferencias telefónicas, con su uso sujeto al acuerdo de los
padres.

Los requisitos para el proceso de resolución aplicables a los Estados que optan por adoptar los
procedimientos de audiencias de debido proceso de la Parte B se encuentran en el Título 34 § 303.442
del CFR.
5 Los requisitos para los Estados que optan por adoptar los procedimientos de audiencias de debido
proceso de la Parte B se encuentran en el Título 34 §§ 303.443 a 303.448 del CFR
4

4

P8.

¿Pueden las audiencias de debido proceso llevarse a cabo virtualmente
cuando las agencias y otras instalaciones públicas están cerradas o tienen
restricciones que impiden las reuniones presenciales?

Sí. Los Estados podrían permitir que las audiencias sobre quejas de debido proceso se
lleven a cabo a través de videoconferencias o conferencias telefónicas, si un
funcionario de audiencias concluye que dichos procedimientos se adhieren a la
práctica legal en el Estado. Título 34 § 303.443(c)(1)(iii) del CFR. Una audiencia
realizada virtualmente debe garantizar el derecho de los padres a una audiencia de
debido proceso imparcial de acuerdo con todos los requisitos que constan en el Título
34 §§ 303.443 a 303.448 del CFR.
P9.

¿Tienen los funcionarios de audiencias, o cuando corresponda, los funcionarios
de revisión, la autoridad para extender los plazos correspondientes para emitir
decisiones sobre quejas de debido proceso durante la pandemia?

Sí. La Ley IDEA permite que un funcionario de audiencias o un funcionario de revisión
conceda extensiones específicas a los plazos a solicitud de cualquiera de las partes de
la audiencia o revisión. Título 34 § 303.447(c) del CFR; consulte el Título 34 § 303.447(a)(b) del CFR para conocer los plazos aplicables. La Ley IDEA no exige que ambas partes
estén de acuerdo con la solicitud de extensión, pero el funcionario de audiencias o el
funcionario de revisión deben documentar la duración de la extensión y el motivo por
el que se proporcionó.

#

#

5

#