IDEA authorizes federal funding for the needs of school-age children with a range of disabilities, such as specific learning disabilities, speech and language impairments, or mental retardation, who need special education services (see fig. 1). In 2007-2008, students covered under IDEA made up about 13 percent of the nation’s public prekindergarten through 12th grade school enrollment and, in fiscal year 2007, states received $10.8 billion in federal funds to provide services to school-age students. To receive federal funds, states and local educational agencies must identify and evaluate children who have a disability and provide special education and related services, as well as supplementary aids and services when necessary, to those who are eligible. Such services and supports are formulated in an individualized education program (IEP), which is developed, discussed, and documented by a student’s IEP team. An IEP team must generally include, among others, the parents of the child, a general education teacher, a special education teacher, and the child when appropriate. IDEA also requires the placement of students in the least restrictive environment—in which students with disabilities are educated with students without disabilities—to the maximum extent appropriate. Regarding PE, IDEA regulations specify that schools must generally provide opportunities for students to participate in regular or general PE classes or, in some cases, specially designed PE if determined by the IEP team. Regarding extracurricular athletics, districts and schools must take steps to provide services to give students with disabilities an opportunity to participate in extracurricular activities, which may include athletics, equal to that of other students. Section 504 prohibits entities that receive federal financial assistance, including elementary and secondary (K-12) schools, from discriminating against otherwise qualified individuals with disabilities. The Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, as amended (ADA) is also a broad antidiscriminatory law protecting individuals with disabilities. Education interprets the ADA and Section 504 in a similar manner. While IDEA students are covered under Section 504, other students who are not covered under IDEA may still have a disability as defined under Section 504. Several of the most common disabilities of students included under Section 504, but not always covered under IDEA, are attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, diabetes, and asthma. In 2006, about 444,000 students with disabilities were covered under 504, and not IDEA, based on the most recent estimates from Education. These students may have an education plan developed under Section 504 that sets forth their needed regular or special education and related aids and services, but the federal requirements for such a plan are much less detailed than for an IEP. Similar to IDEA, Education’s Section 504 regulations require that students with disabilities be provided a free appropriate public education and learn alongside students without disabilities to the maximum extent appropriate. These Section 504 regulations also require that students with disabilities must be provided equal opportunities to participate in PE courses and extracurricular athletics. Unlike IDEA, however, Section 504 does not authorize any federal funding to schools to provide services to students. (See table 1 for more information on IDEA and Section 504.) At the federal level, Education is responsible for administering IDEA, as well as Section 504, as it applies to many educational institutions. The Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP) allocates federal funds to states for their implementation of IDEA programs and monitors states’ ability to provide a free, appropriate public education. For example, states must report to OSEP the amount of time that students who are covered under IDEA spend in their state’s general education classes, including PE. The Office for Civil Rights (OCR), through its headquarters and 12 regional offices, carries out enforcement activities related to Section 504, the ADA, and other antidiscrimination laws. These activities include investigating complaints of discrimination on the basis of race, color, national origin, sex, disability, or age. OSEP and OCR also help states and schools meet their federal requirements and improve the quality of education by issuing policy guidance, disseminating information, and providing technical assistance to individual institutions. Education funds and oversees numerous national and regional research and technical assistance providers, such as regional educational laboratories and national clearinghouses that disseminate information, research, and other support to policymakers and educators at the state and local levels. For example, the Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services, which includes OSEP, supports a network of more than 40 national technical assistance centers, each with a focus on some aspect of special education. At state and district levels, various parties may be involved in providing students with opportunities in PE and extracurricular athletics. For instance, many states have requirements regarding their districts’ provision of PE, according to data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the National Association of State Boards of Education. However, policies may vary by state or district, such as the required grades in which PE should be offered, the number of minutes students should be in class, or the specific content and curriculum areas that should be taught. For extracurricular athletics, the National Federation of State High School Associations (NFHS) is the national body that writes the rules of competition for most high school interscholastic sports—the main form of extracurricular athletic competition in schools, which includes varsity and junior-varsity level teams. In turn, each state has its own state high school athletic association which is a voluntary member of the NFHS. According to an NFHS official, NFHS does not establish standards or policies specifically regarding students with disabilities and each state athletic association develops its own standards and policies. In addition, most state high school athletic associations are not part of state departments of education, but are private organizations, according to NFHS officials. Students with disabilities generally attend PE class about the same amount of time as students without disabilities, according to national data and our site visits. Estimates from YRBS 2005 on high school students indicate that students with physical disabilities or long-term health problems attend PE classes for approximately the same amount of time as those without disabilities. For example, 29 percent of students with physical disabilities or long-term health problems attend PE class 5 days a week compared to 34 percent of students without disabilities (see fig. 2). In 12 schools and seven districts we visited, officials also told us that most students with disabilities are in PE class the same amount of time as students without disabilities. Officials from a few schools said that they actually provide a greater amount of instruction time in PE for some students with disabilities who have specific needs and take both general PE classes and specialized PE classes. National data show that among districts that require PE, many have policies allowing student to be exempt from PE due to long-term physical, medical, or cognitive disabilities. However, exemptions for students with disabilities were very rare according to officials in the 20 schools we visited. Rather than exempting students with disabilities from PE class entirely, a few schools we visited excuse some students from certain activities. For example, officials from one high school in New Jersey we visited told us that a few students with medical conditions, such as asthma, may be exempt from particular activities but that they are given alternative activities. Schools generally provided students with and without disabilities comparable opportunities to participate in PE, according to national data and our site visits. According to 2005 YRBS estimates, students with and without physical disabilities or long-term health problems spend similar amounts of time actually engaged in physical activity per class. For instance, 8 percent of students with physical disabilities or long-term health problems spend 41 to 50 minutes in a typical PE class exercisin playing sports compared to 9 percent of students without these disabilities. students we spoke with, said that students with disabilities often participate in PE to the same extent as their peers without disabilities. In addition, almost all state, district, and school officials we spoke with reported they rarely received complaints about PE from parents of students with disabilities. Several state and district officials said that while they hear complaints from parents in other areas, PE is generally an area in which parents se satisfied. Many district and schools officials, as well as some Various factors may affect students’ experience in PE, such as their school level (e.g., elementary or middle) or their type of disability. For instance, some parents and school officials said that PE teachers in elementary school may be able to more easily integrate students with disabilities in y their classes than those in secondary schools because peers in elementar school are more accepting, the equipment is more varied, and there is less focus on competitive games than in secondary school, which may be harder for students with disabilities to participate. Some district and school officials also said that middle school can be particularly difficu some students with disabilities who may have more difficulty changing into PE uniforms or opening combination locks on their PE lockers. However, some schools overcame these challenges by waiving their PE uniform policy or providing key locks to accommodate students with disabilities. In addition, some parents and school officials noted that ir whether a student has a physical or cognitive disability may affect the experience. For example, officials in one school said that while students with physical impairments required more accommodations, they also may have an easier time expressing their needs than students with cognitive disabilities. On the other hand, many district and school officials told us that students with emotional or behavioral disabilities usually participate in the same activities as other students and often excelled physically. Some noted that PE class can provide them a physical outlet that helps them focus their energy. These estimates have 95 percent confidence intervals within plus or minus 3 percentage points. National data indicate that most students with disabilities who took PE did so in general education classes with students who do not have disabilities. Specifically, 92 percent of students with disabilities in grades 1 through 7 took PE in general education classes, according to SEELS estimates. In grades 7 through 12, 88 percent of students with disabilities took PE in general education classes, according to NLTS2 estimates. Similarly, in most of the schools we visited, the majority of IDEA students received PE in a general classroom without any accommodations or modifications. Officials from a number of schools we visited told us that for some students with disabilities who are in special education classes, PE is the one general education class that they attend on a regular basis. School and district officials also noted that the emphasis on educating students with disabilities in an inclusive environment with their peers without disabilities in all subjects also contributes to the high numbers of students in general PE classes. To facilitate participation for students with disabilities in general PE classes, teachers may make accommodations or modifications for students, which are often informal. According to 2006 SHPPS data and many teachers we interviewed, common informal adjustments that teachers use for students with disabilities in PE class include simplifying the instructional content, providing additional skill modeling or repetition, and having peers without disabilities assist in teaching or coaching (see fig. 3). School officials said that these types of informal accommodations or modifications are generally not determined through the IEP process. In contrast, schools we visited said that more formal accommodations or modifications are usually determined through the IEP process and noted on a student’s IEP. These may include modifying assessments (e.g., allowing students to have more time to take tests); using specialized equipment; or having individual aides or assistants work with students during class. For example, officials from a middle school in California told us that some students with disabilities receive accommodations when taking tests for all their classes, including PE, and this is written on students’ IEPs. Similarly, officials from schools we visited who had individual aides help some students with disabilities in PE class said the use of these aides was also determined on a case-by-case basis through the IEP process. Some schools accommodate students with more severe motor development delays by providing specialized or “adapted” PE instruction, using various approaches. Nationally, less than 11 percent of students with disabilities under IDEA received adapted PE in 2000 and 2001, according to SEELS and NLTS2 estimates. Among the schools and districts we visited, the provision of adapted PE varied. Officials from 8 of the 20 schools we visited reported that no students received adapted PE services at the time we visited. The remaining schools reported that between 2 and 29 percent of IDEA students—who represent most students with disabilities—received adapted PE. Many districts we visited told us that the provision of adapted PE for individual students was always determined through the IEP process. Districts in Minnesota also relied on standard statewide criteria to provide adapted PE, such as formal tests evaluating motor skills or fitness levels. PE muse taught PE techer with dditionpted PE licenbased on or review of te docment nd interview with te offici. According to te offici, techer trining progr encoge propective PE techer to oin thi licene to e more mrketable, nd thus, there re mny more certified pted PE techer in the te thctual poition. Schools we visited provide adapted PE using different approaches. Students may receive direct instruction from an adapted PE teacher, the adapted PE teacher may consult with the general PE teacher who actually provides the specific modifications or accommodations to the student, or schools may use a combination of both approaches. Some states require that adapted PE be taught by a PE teacher with a supplemental license, including California and Minnesota, based on state documents we reviewed and state officials we interviewed. Nationwide, 12 states offer or require a supplemental adapted PE license to teach adapted PE, according to the Center on Disability Health and Adapted Physical Activity. Some adapted PE teachers travel to several schools to provide services in the districts we visited. In one district we visited in Florida, the sole adapted PE teacher overcame challenges in scheduling her time by having students who took adapted PE bussed to a central school so she could provide them with services. Some parents we spoke with were pleased with their children’s adapted PE experiences, while others said that their experiences varied and depended on factors such as individual teaching styles and the extent to which students who received adapted PE were integrated into the general PE class. Cn Do It” progrm, ponored y the Ntionl Intitte of Helth in the Deprtment of Helth nd HService. Sdent with phyicl or cognitive disabilitiern Preidentil Active Lifetyle Awrd if they prticipte in 0 minte of ctivity 5 d week for 6 week. The ditrict o has hyrid PE nd port progrm for dent with disabilitie. Dring the chool dy, dentrticipte in ctivitie such as wheelchir basketball or pted sailing. The ditrict hasined pecilized equipment nd fcility ce throgh commnity prtnerhip, such as with the locsailing club nd conty golf coe. Fewer students receive PE only in separate or self-contained classes as opposed to receiving PE in general classes with other students, according to national data and our site visits. Our estimates from SEELS indicate that 7 percent were in a self-contained special education classroom for PE in 2000. Among eight districts we visited that could provide estimates, the percentage of students with disabilities who received all of their PE in a self-contained, adapted PE class ranged from 0 percent to 6 percent. However, some self-contained PE classes may follow the same curriculum as general PE classes. Officials in two schools we visited told us that students with severe disabilities were in self-contained special education classes and took general PE together as a class. A notable challenge to serving students with disabilities in general PE classes is the lack of sufficient training or experience among PE or classroom teachers, according to our interviews and other research. Many state, district, and school officials we interviewed said that PE teachers typically take one course on working with students with disabilities in their undergraduate training. This coursework may not always include practical experience working with students with disabilities, and several studies found that PE teachers reported feeling insufficiently prepared to teach students with disabilities. According to SHPPS, only 32 percent of teachers surveyed who taught required PE classes reported having received training on how to work with students with long-term physical, medical, or cognitive disabilities in the 2 years preceding the 2006 study. Officials from several disability, health, or PE associations said that general PE or classroom teachers who lack training or experience teaching students with disabilities may not know what to do or how to provide the appropriate level of accommodations or effectively adapt their instruction. Their lack of training and experience may result in their excusing some students with disabilities from portions of the class, according to two associations we interviewed. Some parents we spoke with described instances in which their children sat on the side during certain activities or were not encouraged to be as active as their classmates. Several parents noted that while PE teachers may not intend to be exclusionary, they were not sufficiently trained on how to include students with disabilities in their classes. Some state, district, and school officials we interviewed said teachers who teach general PE need more training opportunities regarding students with disabilities, yet resources for training are not always available. Some officials from states and districts said they provide professional development opportunities to teachers through online training, workshops, or conferences. However, budget shortfalls limited their ability to offer additional training opportunities for PE teachers. Some district officials told us that they would like to receive more information on meeting the needs of students with disabilities in general PE settings. For instance, officials from a rural district in Georgia said that they did not have any teachers who specifically taught adapted PE and all students were taught by a general PE or special education teacher. Officials from this district acknowledged that their teachers would benefit from additional training in adapted PE, but told us that they could only provide training if it were available at a low cost or if they had additional resources. Officials in many of the districts and schools we visited reported that budget constraints created a challenge to providing PE to students with disabilities, particularly in the general PE classroom. For example, many district and school officials, including PE teachers, told us that budget constraints in their schools have resulted in large general PE classes and have hindered teachers’ ability to provide students with disabilities the individual attention they may need. In both of the districts in California that we visited, teachers and school officials said that PE classes can include over 45 students, often with only one teacher. Several teachers noted that they would like to provide more individual attention to students with disabilities in their classes but cannot do so while managing the rest of the class. Another PE teacher in Minnesota said that large classes in a spacious and noisy environment can be particularly hard for students with emotional or behavioral disabilities who are very sensitive to such stimuli. District and school officials said that additional staff, such as paraprofessional aides who could work one-on-one with students with disabilities, would help address the challenge of large classes. However, officials said that budget constraints limit the use of aides. Finally, teachers or district officials in several states told us that limited resources for equipment, including special adapted equipment or facility renovations for outdated gymnasiums, hindered their ability to effectively provide opportunities to students with disabilities. A few state, district, school, and disability association officials we spoke with cited a lack of importance placed on PE as a school subject compared with academic subjects. Some state, district, and school officials noted that the greater emphasis on assessments for reading and math as required by federal law has led them to reduce the number of PE classes that their students are required to take or PE elective courses that they can offer. However, other district officials said their PE offerings have not changed because state laws dictate PE requirements for students, among other reasons. Officials from some districts, schools, disability associations, and parent groups also said that parents of children with disabilities may view PE as a relatively low priority and, subsequently, have low expectations with respect to their children’s participation or performance. National data show that students with disabilities participate in extracurricular athletics but do not fully distinguish whether these athletic opportunities are offered through schools or out-of-school (i.e., through community-based) programs. According to SEELS estimates, 41 percent of students with disabilities in grades 1 through 7 participated in school or community-based extracurricular athletics in 2000. Additionally, according to NLTS2 estimates, 33 percent of students with disabilities in grades 7 through 12 participated in school or community-based extracurricular athletics in 2001. In these studies, more students with disabilities reported participating in school or community-based sports teams than in other extracurricular activities surveyed, such as performance groups (e.g., band or choir), scouting, or special interest groups (e.g., chess or other hobby clubs). However, sports participation was consistently higher for boys with disabilities than for girls with disabilities across age groups. In addition, according to our interviews with Education officials and researchers, we found no national data that was reliable for our purpose of comparing the participation of students with disabilities to students without disabilities in extracurricular athletics. Among the schools we visited, we found that IDEA students participated in school-based extracurricular athletics at varying rates, but at a lower rate than their peers without disabilities. The percentage of IDEA students who participated in “traditional” school-based extracurricular athletics (that is, athletics not specially designed for students with disabilities) ranged from 6 to 25 percent among the 11 schools we visited that could provide estimates. In contrast, the percent of non-IDEA students who participated in traditional extracurricular athletics ranged from 18 to 73 percent in these schools (see fig. 4). In all cases, the participation rates for IDEA students were lower than for non-IDEA students, ranging from 10 to 56 percentage points lower. A number of factors may contribute to these differences among schools, such as outreach to students with disabilities, priorities of school officials, and the level of competitiveness among athletic teams. Some schools we visited in Florida and California actively reached out to some students with disabilities in an effort to recruit them for extracurricular athletics. Several of the special education teachers in a California school we visited also coached different sports teams; this dual role enabled them to encourage students with disabilities to participate, according to one official. Additionally, the leadership of school officials may affect students’ participation in extracurricular athletics, according to some parents, school officials, and officials from disability groups. One parent of a child with a learning disability in California told us that administrators at her daughter’s school recognized that extracurricular athletics was an area where she excelled and wrote into her IEP that she could participate even if her grades did not qualify her. In contrast, the competitiveness of some athletic teams can negatively affect participation among students with disabilities. A district official we spoke with in Texas told us that extracurricular athletics in his district were very competitive and that it was unlikely that many students with disabilities would make these teams. Additionally, one parent told us that she took her daughter who has a neurological disorder out of the school volleyball team because of competitive pressures from other parents and students. Perceptions among students, parents, and schools can also affect student participation in extracurricular athletics, according to a number of officials from schools and disability organizations we interviewed. Specifically, students with disabilities may not perceive themselves as athletic and therefore are reluctant to try out for teams, while parents or schools may resist the idea of students participating due to safety concerns. Student participation on sports teams varies by disability. In most of the schools we visited, officials told us that students with disabilities who participated in extracurricular athletics often had mild cognitive disabilities or learning disabilities. Additionally, national data from NLTS2 indicates that students with hearing impairments, speech impairments, learning disabilities, or other health impairments reported participating on sports teams at a higher rate compared to students with orthopedic impairments, mental retardation, visual impairments, autism, or multiple disabilities. Many officials from schools and disability associations we interviewed said that students with physical disabilities have fewer opportunities in extracurricular athletics compared to students with cognitive disabilities because fewer programs were designed for them. For example, officials said that while students with learning or cognitive disabilities could participate in traditional sports teams with little to no modifications, students with physical disabilities may not be able to do so. Officials from several schools and disability groups also noted that Special Olympics has had a strong influence nationally in providing opportunities for students with intellectual disabilities but that there is not a similar organization for students with physical disabilities. Officials from all 15 districts we spoke with told us that all students in their districts, including those with disabilities, are allowed to try out for their school’s interscholastic athletics teams. In addition, many schools we visited said they have at least some teams that accept all students who try out. These teams were usually those based on individual performance, such as track or swimming, according to school officials. In contrast, other teams, such as soccer or basketball, were very competitive and had a limited number of positions available. Many school officials told us that if a student did not get selected to play on a competitive team, they were encouraged by coaches to play on a team that accepted all students. School officials reported that they provide varying levels of accommodations for students with disabilities on traditional teams, usually depending on the student’s disability. For example, a high school we visited in New Jersey provided an interpreter for a deaf student on the baseball team, and a middle school we visited in California modified rules for deaf and blind students on their wrestling team. State athletic associations in Texas and Minnesota sometimes granted exceptions to their policy on student age limits for students with disabilities. Other methods to aid students with disabilities in extracurricular athletics were less formal. Coaches told us that they may vary their style to meet individual student needs as a practice of good coaching but did not provide any specific accommodations for students with disabilities. For example, coaches in schools that we visited in New Jersey and Florida told us that they repeat rules or give instructions by modeling an activity for students with cognitive or learning disabilities in order to help them better understand game rules. A few schools provided extracurricular athletic opportunities to students with disabilities through formal partnerships with community programs, most commonly Special Olympics. While many schools provided referrals to Special Olympics but did not otherwise facilitate participation, a few schools we visited provided transportation, coaching, or funds to enable students with intellectual disabilities to participate in Special Olympics. Some of these schools also incorporated Special Olympics coaching and activities into class time for students. In addition, a few schools and districts we visited partnered with other community organizations to provide extracurricular athletic opportunities. In Maryland, one high school we visited collaborated with a local golf club to provide extracurricular golf to students with disabilities and an elementary school partnered with the city’s parks and recreation program to provide a sports program for these students. More recently, it introdced pted owling to ddress chllenge tht ditrictced regrding the lck of sufficient ner of dent to form tem or gret dince etween ditrict tht mde regr competition difficlt. Sdent go to their locowling lley to compete “virtually” indent from other chool. Across ll port, dent with phyicl impirment nd cognitive impirment ply on epte te. Prticipting denty ern vity letter. A quarter of the ditrict in the te offer t least one pted port progrm, ccording to offici. allow students with disabilities an opportunity to participate to the fullest extent possible in mainstream PE and athletic programs; and (3) ensure that alternative PE and athletic programs are available, such as adapted sports (only students with disabilities) or unified sports (includes students with and without disabilities). County school systems must develop policies and procedures to promote and protect the inclusion of students with disabilities into mainstream PE and athletic programs and report annually to the State Department of Education. The State Board of Education must adopt a model policy to assist with implementation, while the State Department of Education must monitor compliance and provide technical assistance to county school systems. New Jersey passed a much less detailed law in August 2009 that directs the New Jersey State Interscholastic Athletic Association to establish interscholastic adapted athletics for students with visual impairments or physical disabilities who are participating in an adapted athletic program developed by a school district. The New Jersey State Interscholastic Athletic Association must require coaches of adapted athletics to receive training specific to that program but the law does not outline other requirements. Officials from several districts and state athletic associations said they generally lacked information that would help them provide extracurricular athletic opportunities for students with disabilities. For instance, a number of district officials said coaches do not receive training specifically on how to work with students with disabilities. Some parents we spoke with said that coaches who do not have such training can be overly focused on winning and fail to fully include students with disabilities on their teams. Other parents noted that coaches are rarely at IEP meetings, and one parent in Minnesota told us that a coach improperly removed her child from a team for being academically ineligible without considering the student’s IEP. Additionally, some states and districts lacked information on how to implement new adapted athletic programs for students with disabilities. For example, while the Florida High School Athletic Association planned to initiate a wheelchair track event in the coming year, state and district officials we spoke with said they had questions about how eligibility would be determined and how to provide the equipment needed for these students to participate. Other state athletic associations we interviewed were hesitant to consider offering adapted athletic programs because they did not know how competitive events would be held or how teams would be formed. Further, some districts lacked information and clarity regarding their responsibilities to provide opportunities under Section 504 for students with disabilities who want to participate in extracurricular athletics equal to those provided to other students. Officials in two districts and several disability associations told us that Education’s Section 504 regulations regarding schools’ responsibilities to provide extracurricular opportunities are ambiguous. For example, a few disability associations noted that there is lack of clarity regarding how “equal opportunity” should be defined. Officials from another district questioned whether their responsibilities included providing specifically designed programs for students with disabilities, such as separate adapted athletics, particularly within a school environment focused on greater inclusion for students with disabilities. State, district, and school officials often cited budget constraints as another key challenge to expanding athletic opportunities to all students, including those with disabilities. Officials from seven of the 10 districts we visited said that overall budget constraints have affected funding for their entire athletics program, including funds for personnel and equipment. For example, a rural district we visited in Florida told us that they do not have the resources to fund many personnel positions or buy equipment and that they had to eliminate their athletic director position this year. Another district in California told us that the state’s budget situation has negatively impacted all extracurricular athletics and the district is considering dropping their sports teams in the near future. In addition, district officials cited as a concern the high cost of transporting students with disabilities. Officials in one district in Florida noted that transporting students with disabilities was the largest cost in the district’s extracurricular athletic program. Some school and district officials we spoke with had concerns about the facilities used for competitions. A district official in Florida noted that many facilities are old and the costs associated with making these fields accessible for students with disabilities would be challenging. Finally, some school officials said that budget limitations for their athletic programs limit their ability to create new adapted teams, due to costs associated with training and maintaining coaches and aides to work with students. While OSEP monitors states’ implementation of IDEA and provides information, resources, and technical assistance to states and schools on teaching students with disabilities, very little of it is related to PE or extracurricular athletics, according to OSEP officials and our review of Education Web sites. Beyond technical assistance to current or prospective grantees for special education grants, OSEP has not provided any other relevant information or support. OSEP officials said that OSEP has not used its limited resources to provide such information or support because IDEA’s monitoring priorities are focused on other areas and the office has not received relevant concerns or complaints from states, schools, or parents. Similarly, OCR has not widely disseminated any detailed guidance or information on schools’ responsibilities to provide opportunities in PE or extracurricular athletics for students with disabilities under Section 504, according to agency officials and our review of OCR’s Web site. Based on data from OCR officials, 12,543 complaints were made to its office, from fiscal year 2005 to fiscal year 2009, regarding elementary and secondary school students with disabilities. Of these, 108 of the complaints filed between fiscal year 2005 and fiscal year 2009 (less than 1 percent) pertained to discrimination regarding student participation in PE or extracurricular athletics. From these 108 complaints, we reviewed a subset of 20 and found that 16 alleged that a student was denied equal opportunity to participate in extracurricular athletics. When resolving a Section 504 complaint investigation, OCR may provide detailed guidance or training to help individual districts or schools meet their responsibilities regarding PE or athletics. However, according to OCR officials, such guidance is tailored to the needs of the district or school based on facts obtained through an OCR investigation, and OCR has not yet issued guidance specifically on Section 504’s requirements concerning PE or athletics. Our review of OCR guidance found several documents that state that students with disabilities may not be excluded on the basis of a disability from an extracurricular activity, which may include athletics, and that students must be provided opportunities to participate in these activities equal to those of other students. However, with regard to PE and extracurricular athletics, these documents do not provide information beyond what is stated in the Section 504 regulations. In contrast, OCR has provided more detailed guidance in other civil rights areas, such as letters, pamphlets, and question and answer sheets. OCR officials said they have not yet issued additional guidance on extracurricular athletic opportunities for students with disabilities in part due to resource constraints and their focus on other areas of civil rights, such as gender discrimination in athletics or harassment based on race, sex, and disability. They also noted that these areas have received more official complaints and persistent concerns from constituents such as parents and community groups. Through several grant programs, Education has administered a relatively small amount of funds specifically to support PE or extracurricular athletic opportunities for students with disabilities. For example, OSEP administers a grant program that provides funding to institutes of higher education for the development of special education personnel. In fiscal year 2009, of the $91 million administered for these grants, about 2 percent was used to support programs intended to provide undergraduate or graduate training in the area of adapted PE. In the same fiscal year, OSEP also administered about $8 million, as specifically directed by Congress, to support Special Olympics programs. These federal funds are administered under the Special Olympics Sport and Empowerment Act of 2004 and are intended to increase the participation of individuals with intellectual disabilities in sports and competitive activities. They are also used to design and implement Special Olympics education programs that can be integrated into classroom instruction. In addition, the Office of Safe and Drug-Free Schools (OSDFS) administers the Carol M. White Physical Education Program—the only dedicated PE program sponsored by Education. However, according to OSDFS officials, less than 1 percent of the program’s overall funding of $77 million in fiscal year 2009 was used to serve the specific needs of students with disabilities. To serve these needs, grantees used funds to purchase specialized equipment or provide training to teachers and staff on how to adapt their general PE programming and activities for students with disabilities. Officials from several states and many districts we interviewed said that they could benefit from Education helping states and schools share relevant information, such as practices or resources regarding PE and extracurricular athletics for students with disabilities. For example, officials from one state told us that when they recently developed new guidance for schools in PE and extracurricular athletics for students with disabilities, they could have benefited from information on what other states were doing in these areas. Officials from another state noted that Education could collect information on promising practices and share these with institutes of higher education that offer PE teacher training programs. Additionally, officials from 14 out of 15 districts we interviewed indicated that additional information or resources from Education on how to offer PE or extracurricular athletic opportunities to students with disabilities would be useful. For example, an adapted PE coordinator in a California district said that while he draws on existing informational resources, such as private sector Web sites and state or local conferences, he is constantly looking for additional information from others in his field on good practices and policies. Similarly, a PE and health director in a Florida district noted that as more states implement new wheelchair track and field activities in the general high school athletic program, supporting information and procedural practices would be helpful. Further, a number of officials from various associations we interviewed, including those representing special education, PE, and adapted sports, said that Education should share information on successful practices or provide informational resources such as factsheets or toolkits. Some association officials also said that Education could give additional attention to PE or extracurricular athletics, by providing information online or promoting greater awareness through media campaigns. This attention would increase awareness among schools about the types of opportunities that could be provided, promote interest among students with disabilities to participate in such activities, and address concerns and questions among parents. Officials from many districts and several disability groups also said that additional guidance from Education, specifically on extracurricular athletics, would be useful. Officials in 12 of 15 districts we spoke with told us that additional clarification and communication from Education regarding schools’ responsibilities under Section 504 in providing extracurricular athletics to students with disabilities would be useful. Specifically, one district official noted that the lack of clarity in federal requirements regarding how schools should define and provide equal opportunities serves as a disincentive for schools to take proactive steps to provide additional opportunities for students with disabilities. Another said that while most districts give a “good faith effort” to provide equal opportunities in extracurricular activities, including athletics, district officials probably do not fully understand what it means to provide equal opportunities until a problem arises, such as parent concerns or complaints. According to this official, districts would benefit from additional information on the legal issues or processes involved in allowing students with disabilities to participate in extracurricular athletics, as well as how to document instances in which a student is or is not allowed to participate. Officials from another district noted that school responsibilities related to special education services or supports for activities that occurred after school, such as extracurricular athletics, as opposed to those during the school day, were not entirely clear. Similarly, officials from several disability groups noted that OCR could do more to ensure that schools provide equal opportunities in extracurricular athletics, such as by reminding schools of their responsibilities and what they entail (e.g., through informational factsheets). Officials from one disability association also said that they do not believe parents and students with disabilities know where to turn for help with respect to problems regarding extracurricular athletics and that OCR could help inform parents and schools by issuing a letter reminding them that OCR is a resource. All students, including those with disabilities, benefit from the positive effects that physical activity and school athletics have on an individual’s health, social well-being, and self-esteem. While available data show that students with disabilities generally are participating in physical education classes to a similar extent as students without disabilities and that some also are involved in school sports, we found that many districts and schools we visited are interested in improving how they provide physical education and athletic opportunities to these students. Garnering additional resources to provide such opportunities is difficult at a time when states and districts are operating under severe fiscal constraints. However, certain districts and schools may have developed approaches or activities to engage students with disabilities more fully in the PE classroom or in extracurricular athletics, and leveraging their expertise could be helpful to other schools that face challenges in these areas. Some schools may also be uncertain about their exact responsibilities to provide opportunities to students with disabilities equal to those of other students, particularly regarding extracurricular athletics. Without additional clarification from Education, schools may not be providing some students full access to these opportunities. While Education has not addressed these issues because it has targeted its limited resources to other areas, focusing some of its existing resources on helping schools provide opportunities in PE and extracurricular athletics could yield important benefits and enable students with disabilities to more fully experience the rewards of physical activity. To help states and schools access existing knowledge and resources, we recommend that the Secretary of Education facilitate information sharing among states and schools on ways to provide opportunities in PE and extracurricular athletics to students with disabilities. For instance, Education could provide Web site links to resources or practices used by states, districts, schools, or organizations in PE or extracurricular athletics for students with disabilities. Such information could be posted on its Web site or discussed at conferences or Webinars. To ensure that schools are aware of their responsibilities and that students with disabilities consistently have opportunities to participate in extracurricular athletics equal to those of other students, we recommend that Education clarify and communicate schools’ responsibilities under Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act regarding the provision of extracurricular athletics. For example, Education could provide clarifying guidance to schools through its Web site or at conferences. We provided a draft of the report to the Department of Education for review and comment. Education’s written comments are presented in appendix IV. Education agreed with our two recommendations to provide more information and guidance. Specifically, Education concurred that further information sharing on providing opportunities in PE and extracurricular athletics to students with disabilities would be helpful to states, schools, and students. It plans to identify useful information on this subject and share such information by posting it on its Web site, www.ed.gov. Education also agreed that it is important for schools to be aware of their responsibilities under Section 504 to provide opportunities in extracurricular athletics equal to those of other students and plans to issue additional guidance addressing this in fiscal year 2011. It also provided technical comments, which we incorporated throughout the draft as appropriate. We are sending copies to appropriate congressional committees, the Secretary of Education, and other interested parties. The report also will be available at no charge on the GAO Web site at http://www.gao.gov. If you or your staff have any questions about this report, please contact me at (202) 512-7215 or ashbyc@gao.gov. Contact points for our Offices of Congressional Relations and Public Affairs may be found on the last page of this report. Key contributors to this report are listed in appendix V. To address the objectives of this study, we used a variety of methods. Specifically, we examined pertinent data from four nationally representative studies; conducted site visits in five states and phone interviews with two conducted 21 interviews with representatives from national associations, community organizations, parent advocacy centers, or researchers in the areas of disability, health, physical education (PE), special education, and athletics; and interviewed officials from the Department of Education (Education) about Education’s oversight and technical assistance efforts, and reviewed relevant federal laws, regulations, guidance, and other agency documentation and data pertaining to PE and extracurricular athletics for students with disabilities. To obtain national information on the extent to which schools provide students with disabilities opportunities in PE and extracurricular athletics, we identified four nationally representative studies with the most recent data available for our purposes. Specifically, we examined pertinent data from the 2005 Youth Risk Behavior Survey (YRBS) and cited published data from the 2006 School Health Policies and Programs Study (SHPPS). Both studies are administered by the Department of Health and Human Services’ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. YRBS surveys students in grades 9 through 12 on health-risk behaviors, and SHPPS collects survey information on school health programs and practices from state, district, and school officials, as well as teachers and parents. We also examined 2001 data from Education’s National Longitudinal Transition Study-2 (NLTS2) and 2000 data from Education’s Special Education Elementary Longitudinal Study (SEELS). To calculate the percentage of students with disabilities in these studies who did not participate in sports, we included students who reported not participating in any extracurricular activities, as well as students who reported participating in some extracurricular activities but not sports. SEELS and NLTS2 consist of nationally representative samples of students who received special education services. Students in SEELS were 6 to 12 years old and in at least the first grade in 1999, and students in NLTS2 were 13 to 16 years old and in at least the seventh grade in 2000 (see table 2). We selected these sources, in consultation with GAO methodologists, because they contained nationally representative information about the participation of students with disabilities in PE and extracurricular athletics and were determined to be sufficiently reliable for the purposes of our report. We examined the studies’ technical documentation to determine their purpose, the population described, the sample surveyed, data collection methods, and the focus of questions and variables related to students with disabilities and PE and extracurricular athletics. Using this documentation, and through interviews with knowledgeable agency officials, we evaluated the reliability and quality of these data, as well as the extent to which they could be used to answer our questions. Additionally, while more recent data are available from NLTS2 and SEELS, we determined, through interviews with knowledgeable agency officials and our own analyses, that the data collected during the first wave of these two longitudinal studies were preferable, for substantive and technical reasons, for the purposes of our report. Such substantive issues included relevant student grade levels, and technical reasons included high attrition rates in later waves. We used the same methodology as Education to produce estimates on the participation in extracurricular athletics among students with disabilities. We determined that the data we analyzed were sufficiently reliable for our purposes. We assessed the quality, reliability, and usability of the data for reporting descriptive statistics on the demographic characteristics of students with disabilities (e.g., grade level, gender, and type of disability), and their participation in PE and extracurricular athletics. Because each of the three surveys we provided estimates for (SEELS, NLTS2, and YRBS) followed a selection procedure based on random selections, each sample is only one of a number of samples that might have been drawn. To assess the precision of estimates from these three surveys, we calculated confidence intervals at the 95 percent level for each measure. A confidence interval gives an estimated range of values, calculated from sample data, which is likely to include the true measure of the population. All percentage estimates from SEELS and NLTS2 used in this report have 95 percent confidence intervals within plus or minus 4 percentage points, unless otherwise noted. All percentage estimates from YRBS used in this report have 95 percent confidence intervals within plus or minus 7 percentage points, unless otherwise noted. All SHPPS estimates have 95 percent confidence intervals within plus or minus 5.5 percentage points of the estimates, unless otherwise noted. All comparisons made between groups are significant, unless otherwise noted. We analyzed data from YRBS, SEELS, and NLTS2 using SUDAAN (Survey Data Analysis) ®, a statistical analysis software package with capabilities to analyze surveys with a stratified, multistaged cluster sampling design, such as that found in YRBS, SEELS, and NLTS2. To address all three of our objectives, we conducted site visits in five states (California, Florida, Maryland, Minnesota, and New Jersey) and interviewed officials from state departments of education, state athletic associations, school districts, and schools. We also interviewed teachers, coaches, parents, and students. In each of these states we visited two school districts and four schools. In addition, we conducted phone interviews with officials from state agencies and two to three school district offices in Georgia and Texas. We selected these seven states because they were in the top half of states in numbers of both IDEA students and Section 504 students and varied in whether they had policies requiring elementary, middle, and secondary schools to teach PE, and geographic location. We chose school districts that provided variation in their percentages of students with disabilities, socio-economic status, and classification as urban, rural, or suburban. In deciding between multiple states or districts that met our selection criteria, we purposely chose some that external stakeholders recommended as having innovative or promising practices. We spoke with parents by contacting one to two Parent Training and Information Centers in each state we visited. These parent centers are funded by Education and provide information and support to families of children with disabilities of all ages. For this study, staff from these centers asked parent members to voluntarily meet with GAO to share their children’s experiences in PE and extracurricular athletics. At some meetings, children also attended with their parents and shared their views. We cannot generalize to all states, school districts, or schools based on these site visits. Through our site visits and phone interviews, we gathered information on relevant state and district policies, available data or estimates on students’ participation in PE and extracurricular athletics, and factors that may affect participation. We also inquired about the approaches districts and schools use to provide opportunities in PE and extracurricular athletics, key challenges to providing these opportunities, and areas in which federal assistance has been or would be useful. When possible, we reviewed written documentation and policies from state agencies, districts, and schools. We also observed some classrooms and athletic practices and spoke with groups of students at schools we visited. To enhance the consistency of the information we obtained from interviews, we used structured sets of questions for officials from state agencies, district offices, and schools, as well as parents. We analyzed interview information by developing and testing a coding structure and coding the interviews using NVivo, a qualitative analysis software. One team member coded all the interviews, and another reviewed 100 percent of the coded output for accuracy. Using a short questionnaire, we obtained estimates from officials in the districts and schools we visited of the number of students with disabilities in PE and extracurricular athletics. We inquired about students covered under IDEA, as well as those covered under Section 504, but not IDEA. However, we did not include numbers of students covered only under Section 504 in these tables due to the number of missing responses and the few students in each district or school in this group. We visited two schools in each district we visited. Unless otherwise noted, differences made between groups in these tables are not statistically significant at p-value less than 0.05. In addition to the contact above, Elizabeth Morrison (Assistant Director), Theresa Lo (analyst-in-charge), Hedieh Rahmanou Fusfield, and Michael Pahr made significant contributions to this report. Steven Putansu, Dae Park, and Shana Wallace assisted with the data analysis and methodology. Alexander Galuten provided legal support. James Bennett assisted with graphics. Susannah Compton and Jessica Orr assisted in report development.

Summary: Research has established that physical activity and participation in athletics provides important health and social benefits for children. Certain federal laws help ensure that kindergarten-12th grade schools provide students with disabilities opportunities to participate in physical education (PE) and extracurricular athletics equal to those of their peers. However, national associations have questioned whether students with disabilities receive opportunities similar to their peers. Regarding students with disabilities, GAO was asked to examine (1) what is known about the PE opportunities that schools provide, and how do schools provide these; (2) what is known about the extracurricular athletic opportunities that schools provide, and how do schools provide these; and (3) how the Department of Education (Education) assists states and schools in these areas. GAO analyzed federal survey data; reviewed relevant federal laws and regulations; and interviewed state, district, and school officials in selected states, as well as parents and disability association officials. Schools provide students with and without disabilities similar opportunities to participate in PE but face challenges when serving students with disabilities. Students with disabilities spend similar amounts of time in PE class and exercising in class as students without disabilities, according to national data and GAO site visits. Most students with disabilities take PE with other students in general PE classes. To facilitate their participation, teachers may make accommodations for some students, such as providing additional modeling or repetition. Many state, district, and school officials GAO interviewed cited teacher preparation and budget constraints as key challenges to serving students with disabilities in general PE classes. For example, they said general PE teachers need more training opportunities on working specifically with students with disabilities, yet resources for training are not always available. Limited national data suggest that students with disabilities participate in extracurricular athletics, but do not distinguish whether these opportunities are offered through schools or community programs. Among the schools GAO visited, students with disabilities participated in athletics at varying rates, but at consistently lower rates than students without disabilities. Several factors, such as a student's disability type or outreach to students, may affect participation. Some schools or districts GAO interviewed provided opportunities by partnering with community programs or offering athletics designed specifically for students with disabilities, such as wheelchair basketball. District and school officials GAO interviewed cited a lack of information on ways to expand athletic opportunities, lack of clarity regarding schools' responsibilities, and budget constraints as key challenges. Education has provided little information or guidance on PE or extracurricular athletics for students with disabilities, and some states and districts GAO interviewed said more would be useful. According to agency officials, Education has not provided much information or guidance because it has targeted its limited resources on other areas, such as monitoring priorities specified in federal law. Officials from several states and many districts said they could benefit from Education helping states and schools to share information on practices or resources regarding PE and athletics for students with disabilities. Officials from districts and disability groups also said more clarification from Education on schools' responsibilities under federal law on extracurricular athletics for students with disabilities would be useful.