A special education dispute may involve a variety of issues. According to an Education study published in 2011, the most common topics of disputes were (1) whether schools were providing an appropriate educational environment for certain students; (2) whether schools carried out the education programs as set forth in the IEP; (3) the types of special education and related services, if any, specific children needed; and (4) children’s eligibility for IDEA services and whether eligibility determinations were properly made. A range of methods exists to resolve special education disputes, ranging from formal hearings and state complaint procedures to less formal, alternative methods. IDEA and its implementing regulations have long required states to provide two formal methods—due process hearings and state complaint resolutions—for resolving disputes between parents and school districts. Although both methods provide avenues for resolving such disputes, these processes differ with respect to who can file each type of complaint, subject matter, timing, procedures, and appeal processes. IDEA provides that parents and school districts have the right to file a due process complaint notice to request a due process hearing on any matter relating to the identification, evaluation, or educational placement of a child, or the provision of a free appropriate public education to a child with a disability. For example, a parent might file a due process complaint over whether a school district is using the appropriate instructional methods for a child. After filing a complaint but prior to holding a hearing, IDEA requires parties to a dispute to attend a resolution meeting where parents discuss their complaint and the facts that form the basis of the complaint and the LEA is given the opportunity to resolve the complaint, unless the parent and the LEA agree in writing to waive the meeting or use IDEA’s mediation process. The purpose of the resolution meeting is to achieve a prompt and early resolution of a parent’s due process complaint to avoid a more costly and adversarial due process hearing and the potential for civil litigation. If the parties reach an agreement at the resolution meeting, then a due process hearing is not necessary. If the parties do not reach an agreement or choose to waive this meeting, a due process hearing is held. A due process hearing is an administrative proceeding in which an impartial hearing officer receives evidence, provides for the examination and cross-examination of witnesses by each party, and then issues a report of findings of fact and a decision. Either party can appeal a hearing officer’s decision in any state court of competent jurisdiction or in federal court without regard to the amount in controversy. Education’s regulations pertaining to state complaint procedures permit parents and organizations and individuals, including those from another state, to file a complaint with the SEA alleging that a public agency has violated a requirement of IDEA, Part B. This differs from a due process complaint in part because, while only parents and public agencies can file due process complaints, any organization or individual, including one from another state, may file a written state complaint. Once the complaint has been filed, the SEA must carry out an independent on-site investigation if the SEA determines that an investigation is necessary.must then make a determination and issue a written decision that may include specific procedures for implementation of its decision. In contrast to due process procedures, parties cannot file an appeal in state or federal court. See figure 1 for a comparison of the steps involved in due process and state complaint process under IDEA. Education established specific timelines for issuing decisions resulting from due process hearings and state complaint resolutions and set terms by which these timelines can be extended (see table 1). A variety of alternative dispute resolution methods exist that provide opportunities for parties to resolve disputes prior to due process hearings or state complaint resolutions. These include two methods states are required to provide under IDEA—mediation and resolution meetings—as well as others that states have voluntarily implemented. Either a parent or a school district can initiate the mediation process, which must be voluntary for each party. Mediations are conducted by a qualified and impartial individual who is trained in effective mediation techniques and knowledgeable in laws and regulations about special education and related services. If the parties reach an agreement through the mediation process, they must execute a signed, written agreement. According to Education the agreement is enforceable in any state or federal district court or by the SEA if the state has other procedures that permit parties to seek enforcement of mediation or resolution agreements. Resolution meetings allow parents and districts an opportunity to resolve a dispute without due process hearings by providing an opportunity for them to discuss the due process complaint and the facts that form the basis of that complaint without necessarily having attorneys present.Similar to mediation, if the parties reach agreement in a resolution meeting, they must execute a signed written agreement that is enforceable in state or federal court. Alternative methods that states have voluntarily developed and implemented are generally meant to help to facilitate early resolution of disputes before they proceed to a due process hearing and to preserve relationships between families and educators. Examples of early resolution practices include educator training in conflict resolution, which is designed to equip individuals with skills to better communicate and negotiate their positions and interests, and facilitated IEP meetings in which a facilitator helps keep members of the IEP team focused on the development of the IEP while addressing conflicts and disagreements that may arise during the meeting. To ensure states comply with the requirements of their IDEA grants, Education’s Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP) conducts a variety of activities to oversee and assist them, including monitoring states’ performance on a variety of indicators. We have previously reported that agencies need to have performance measures that demonstrate results, are limited to a vital few, cover multiple priorities, and provide useful information for decision making in order to track how their programs and activities can contribute to attaining the agency’s goals and mission. Further, past GAO work has shown that agencies successful in measuring performance had performance measures reflecting a range of attributes, such as clarity in how measures are stated and defined. Education uses four performance measures for dispute resolution as part of a system of performance measures to guide SEAs in their implementation of IDEA and in how they report their progress and performance to the department (see table 2). Education established a new IDEA data center to help states, school districts, and other entities build capacity for collecting high quality IDEA performance data, including dispute resolution data, and makes these data available to the public on the center’s website. Education uses a variety of tools, including analyzing states’ performance data and conducting desk audits and on-site visits to monitor states’ compliance with IDEA’s dispute resolution requirements and target technical assistance. Education has also recognized that involving parents in the education of their children with disabilities is important to preventing or mitigating disputes with school districts. In addition to data on dispute resolution, Education also requires states to provide data on the extent to which parents report that schools facilitated parent involvement to improve services and results for children with disabilities. Education provides several forms of technical assistance to help states implement informal early resolution methods to facilitate the timely resolution of disputes. For example, Education funds the National Center on Dispute Resolution in Special Education to provide states with assistance in implementing a range of dispute resolution options, including those that provide opportunities for early, less costly, and less adversarial dispute resolution. Education also funds a national network of Parent Training and Information Centers that provide parents in each state with information about their rights under IDEA and the options available to them for resolving special education disputes. Lastly, Education provides written guidance on dispute resolution procedures under IDEA. Since 2004, the nationwide rates of due process hearings—a key indicator of serious disputes between parents and school districts and a formal method for resolving disputes—have decreased substantially (see fig. 2). As shown in figure 2, this trend was largely driven by steep rate declines in New York, District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico—three locations that have relatively high rates of due process hearings. SEA representatives in these locations cited the use of mediation or resolution meetings as key among the reasons for the declines. Additionally, a New York official told us that the use of settlement agreements prior to due process hearing decisions may have also contributed to declines in hearings, while a District of Columbia official pointed to improvements in identifying students with special education needs earlier and delivering services more efficiently. Lastly, a representative for Puerto Rico told us that improvements in how the SEA handles due process complaints and the use of technology have resulted in a decline in hearings. Despite such substantial declines, due process hearings in these locations still comprised over 80 percent of due process hearings nationally in 2011-2012. For trends in the numbers of due process hearings in these locations and all other states, see figure 3. Outside of these three locations, the rate of due process hearings has remained consistently low, ranging from 1.5 hearings per 10,000 special education students in 2004-2005 to 0.7 hearings in 2011-2012. These overall low rates of due process hearings are slightly lower than observations we made over a decade ago, when we found that due process hearings occurred at a low rate of about 5 per 10,000 special Education officials told us that reducing the education students in 2000.occurrence of due process hearings was generally positive—considering that hearings can be protracted, adversarial and costly. However, they suggested that a low number of due process hearings may not necessarily indicate a lack of problems associated with delivering special education services. They suggested that dispute resolution trends should be understood in combination with other information on individual states, such as parents’ awareness of the procedural safeguards under IDEA. According to state education officials, certain types of complaints have been associated with the substantially higher rates of due process hearings in New York, District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico. For example, state education officials in these locations told us that that many due process hearings were held because parents and officials from their children’s school districts disagreed on whether to place the students in private schools.