For students with disabilities, what's the difference between IEPs and 504 plans?
Two federal laws – the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act – prohibit discrimination against students with disabilities.
The U.S. Department of Education has for decades enforced the Individuals with Disabilities Act, but that could change under President Donald Trump. Trump signed an executive order in March attempting to close the federal Education Department. He's said that the Department of Health and Human Services, which enforces Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, could oversee special education in the future.
The two civil rights laws ensure that students are placed in the "least restrictive environments" so they are not separated from their peers unless truly necessary.
The majority of students with disabilities protected under the laws in the nation's public schools have learning or developmental disabilities, including autism, dyslexia, attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder and down's syndrome. Students who are deaf, blind or have other physical impairments are also protected by the laws.
More: RFK Jr. says the government will know what caused the 'autism epidemic' by September
The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act specifically requires schools to provide students with disabilities an equitable education to their nondisabled peers. That means schools must ensure students have access to an Individualized Education Plan, a written plan for accommodations that help students thrive in school based on their specific needs. These plans can include tests, assignments or lessons that are tailored to a student's learning style.
Section 504 guarantees students with disabilities a different type of learning plan that is commonly known as a 504 plan. These learning plans are for students with a wide range of disabilities who need specific tools to help them learn equally to their peers in an integrated classroom. The accommodations can include a desk with an adjusted height for a student with a wheelchair, noise-canceling headphones for a student who has trouble staying focused or braille textbooks for a blind or visually impaired student.
Disability rights experts, advocates and parents have told USA TODAY they're worried about the fate of these federally protected learning plans for students with disabilities under the Trump administration. It's still unclear whether or how protections for students with disabilities will be affected by a potential closure of the federal Education Department.
Carrie Gillispie, a senior policy analyst with the education policy program at the liberal-leaning think tank New America, called the uncertainty of what will happen under the Trump administration is leading to more confusion for parents and teachers about legal rights for students with disabilities.
Here are some of the key differences between the learning plans and how they can help students with disabilities and their families.
Special education experts Worry about students with disabilities post-Education Department
The Individuals with Disabilities Act, originally named the Education for All Handicapped Children Act when it was enacted in 1975, protects about 7.5 million students with disabilities in the United States from being turned away from public schools.
Before the Individuals with Disabilities Act, neighborhood public schools could reject students with disabilities. Those kids would then either attend segregated schools for students with special needs or not go to school.
Today, students with disabilities are guaranteed access to an Individualized Education Plan, known as an IEP. The plan allows schools to adjust their approach to meet the student's learning needs.
"If a child has an IEP and I'm their teacher, I could change their worksheet to adjust the difficulty level or the length." Gillispie said.
For a student to get formally recognized they have a disability that affords them the right to an IEP, they must first be evaluated by their school district. After school staff determine that a student qualifies for an IEP, they have 30 days to meet with the student and their parents about creating a written plan.
A group of people, often including school staff and parents, decide on a student's learning goals and the learning adjustments they might need to achieve them. Teachers are tasked with implementing these practices and modifications and for monitoring student progress.
If a plan isn't working, an IEP can change to reflect a student's needs.
The IEP resides with the school district and travels with them throughout their schooling careers. For example, if a student graduates middle school the IEP will follow them to high school.
Gillispie, in her role as a school psychologist who works with students with disabilities, assesses kids on their learning abilities when it's determined that they need an IEP.
Then, she evaluates that information to see what classroom practices would best help them thrive.
The journey to obtaining and modifying an IEP that works for a student with disabilities is notoriously challenging for parents, Gillispie said. Parents and educators often disagree on what a child needs to succeed and there's a knowledge gap between what parents know their child has access to and the reality of what the federal law offers them, she said.
That's partly because each student has vastly unique needs.
"Even three students with dyslexia will have some similar challenges, but will also be very different," Gillispie said.
For parents of kids with disabilities Why IEPs could become more frustrating
Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, which was enacted in 1973, also requires schools to help students attend and thrive in traditional classes with nondisabled students.
Students with disabilities who need specific tools − as opposed to curriculum modifications − to help them learn equally to their peers in integrated classrooms are offered 504 plans, said Daniel Van Sant, director of disability policy for the Harkin Institute for Public Policy & Citizen Engagement.
Will a Texas-led legal fight Over gender dysphoria threaten disabled student protections?
These tools can include noise-cancelling headphones, assisted technology, additional breaks and clear deadlines, he said.
Students with disabilities may have access to both 504 plans and IEPs if they need adjustments to curriculum and the learning environment to thrive.
More than one million students with disabilities receive assistance from this type of education plan, according to the most recent data from the federal Education Department.
Contact Kayla Jimenez at kjimenez@usatoday.com. Follow her on X at @kaylajjimenez.
This article originally appeared on USA TODAY: What's the difference between IEPs and 504 plans?
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
28 minutes ago
- Yahoo
'South Park' Turns Up The Heat On Trump With 'Perfect' Return Of Beloved Character
'South Park' released a new clip teasing Wednesday night's episode that features the return of a fan-favorite character as the show appears set to continue trolling President Donald Trump. The clip shows Towelie ― a sentient towel who loves to get high ― arriving by bus in Washington, D.C. to find the city under military control. 'This seems like the perfect place for a towel,' Towelie says as he watches a tank roll past the White House ― mimicking the real-life situation in which Trump has sent the National Guard into the city. Trump has claimed the military is needed to bring order to a city besieged by crime. However, the violent crime rate there dropped in both 2024 and 2025, leading critics to blast the move as a 'stunt.' 'South Park' has pulled a few stunts of its own since the show returned last month, mocking corporate parent Paramount for caving to Trump by agreeing to pay $16 million to settle a lawsuit over '60 Minutes' that most legal observers considered frivolous. Related: Trump has claimed the settlement includes PSAs, and 'South Park' mockingly gave him one at the end of the episode, which showed a very realistic Trump stripping in the desert until he was naked, complete with a talking 'teeny tiny' penis. The show continued to go after Trump and his administration in the second episode, which focused mostly on Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem. The next episode airs Wednesday night on Comedy Central, and will stream on Paramount+. 'South Park' Goes Scorched-Earth On Trump In Shockingly NSFW Season Premiere Aubrey Plaza Details 'Awfulness' After Her Husband's Shocking Death Elon Musk Was Not Pleased With 'Silicon Valley' Show's Portrayal Of Tech Parties
USA Today
29 minutes ago
- USA Today
Guns or weed? Trump administration says you can't use both.
The Justice Department wants the Supreme Court to make clear that regular pot smokers, and other users of illegal drugs, cannot own guns. WASHINGTON – The Trump administration's aggressive defense of gun rights has at least one exception. The government's lawyers want the Supreme Court to make clear that regular pot smokers – and other drug users − shouldn't be allowed to own firearms. An appeals court has said a federal law making it a crime for drug users to have a gun can't be used against someone based solely on their past drug use. Limiting the law to blocking the use of guns while a person is high effectively guts the statute that reduces gun violence, the Justice Department told the Supreme Court. They're asking the justices to overturn the appeals court's decision. Trump's Justice Department has sided with gun owners in other cases The department's defense of the law is particularly notable as the Trump administration has sided with gun rights advocates in other cases – including one in which they declined to appeal a lower court's ruling against a federal law setting 21 as the minimum age to own a handgun. More: Trump DOJ wants Supreme Court to bring down hammer on gun rules But on the issue of drug use, the government is appealing four cases to the Supreme Court, asking the justices to focus on one involving a dual citizen of the United States and Pakistan who was charged with unlawfully owning a Glock pistol because he regularly smoked marijuana. The FBI had been monitoring Ali Danial Hemani because of his alleged connection to Iran's paramilitary Revolutionary Guard, which the government has designated a global terrorist group, according to filings. The government also alleges Hemani used and sold promethazine, an antihistamine used to treat allergies and motion sickness that can boost an opioid high, and used cocaine, although he was prosecuted based on his marijuana use. Hemani's attorneys said the government is trying to 'inflame and disparage' Hemani's character and the only facts that matter are that he was not high when the FBI found the Glock 19 in his Texas home. Hemani was charged with violating the federal law that prohibits the possession of firearms by a person who 'is an unlawful user of or addicted to any controlled substance.' More: Supreme Court sides with Biden and upholds regulations of ghost guns to make them traceable Appeals court ruled past drug use not enough to stop gun ownership The New Orleans-based 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said that the law can't be applied to Hamani under the Supreme Court's landmark 2022 decision that gun prohibitions must be grounded in history that is "consistent with our tradition of gun regulation." While history and tradition support 'some limits on a presently intoxicated person's right to carry a weapon,' the appeals court said, 'they do not support disarming a sober person based solely on past substance usage.' The Justice Department said the appeals court got it wrong. Laws that existed at the time the country was founded restricted the rights of habitual drinkers, even when they were sober, they argued. 'And for about as long as legislatures have regulated drugs, they have prohibited the possession of arms by drug users and addicts – not just by persons under the influence of drugs,' they wrote. Law used in hundreds of prosecutions, including Hunter Biden's Since the federal government created its background-check system for firearms in 1998, the federal restriction on drug users has stopped more gun sales than any requirement other than the ban on felons and fugitives owning weapons, according to the filing. And it's used in hundreds of prosecutions each year, they said. (Hunter Biden, who was later pardoned by his father during President Joe Biden's final weeks in office, was convicted in 2024 of violating the law by purchasing a gun despite having a known drug addiction.) Hunter Biden trial recap Joe Biden's son guilty on all charges in historic gun case Hemani's lawyers argue that the government's interpretation of the law makes no sense when an estimated 19% of Americans have used marijuana and about 32% own a firearm. That means millions of Americans are violating the law that could put them behind bars for up to 15 years, they said in a filing. The appeals court, Hemani's lawyers said, correctly applied the Supreme Court's past decisions and 'common sense' to rule that 'history and tradition only supports a ban on carrying firearms while intoxicated.' In addition to the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, two other appeals courts have issued rulings that restrict use of the federal ban: both courts ruled there should be individualized assessments of defendants' drug use to determine if their rights could be restricted. Trump administration touts program to restore gun rights The Justice Department argues that 'marginal' cases are better addressed on a case-by-case basis, through a federal program the Trump administration restarted that lets individuals petition to have their gun rights restored. The administration's championship of that program makes it less surprising that the Justice Department is vigorously defending the ban on drug users having guns, said Andrew Willinger, executive director of the Duke Center for Firearms Law, a research center. In addition, the administration has shown a broad desire to crack down on illegal drug use. 'In some sense, when those two areas are colliding – gun rights and anti-drug policies – it looks like anti-drug policies are going to win out,' he said. More: Supreme Court rules Mexico can't sue US gunmakers over cartel violence Willinger said there's a relatively strong chance the Supreme Court will get involved, which the justices tend to do when a lower court strikes down or restricts the application of a federal criminal law – especially if the government asks them to intervene. But the high court could also wait to see how other appeals courts handle similar cases and how well the Justice Department's program for restoring gun rights addresses these concerns, he said. The court could announce whether it will take up the issue this fall.
Boston Globe
29 minutes ago
- Boston Globe
Trump is fighting something in D.C., but it isn't crime
When the man says no, the agent continues. 'Yeah, Trump's got all federal agencies coming together, seven days, and going out trying to stop the violent crime, all kind of stuff,' the agent says. He continues: 'Smoking, drinking in public, right, it can't happen.' I'm a Detroit-born, Boston transplant at heart, but I've worked as a journalist in Washington for nearly two decades. Though I've built my career here working only for Get The Gavel A weekly SCOTUS explainer newsletter by columnist Kimberly Atkins Stohr. Enter Email Sign Up Understandably, I have some very strong and very personal views about the president's Advertisement Most obviously, sending armed federal agents and the National Guard to patrol the streets of the nation's capital bears all the hallmarks of a But from my local vantage point, I see even more layers to this dangerous gambit. Advertisement First, let's dispel the idea that Trump's effort is driven in any way by a true desire to make D.C. a better place to live and visit. Trump points to anecdotal evidence, like the If Trump really wanted to fight crime here, there are many things he could do that would actually help, starting with telling his fellow Republicans in Congress to release No, Trump's crime crusade is about something else. Aside from satisfying his Trump loves a shock-and-awe-style attack on perceived domestic enemies. Look at Trump's immigration crackdown, complete with images of suspected immigrants being detained and held in brutally inhumane facilities with nicknames like 'Alligator Alcatraz.' It's a show put on by the former reality show host and the latest episode is brought to you from Democratic-controlled cities he has long railed against. Crime fighting isn't the point. Cruelty is. Advertisement It's gut wrenching to see it happening in a place so filled with history, culture, and joy. It's a richness that comes not just from transplants like me or its world-renown cultural institutions (which are They, and I, want safe, well-policed, and well-resourced communities. Not a federal takeover. And I'm exhausted by the crime hot takes from people who couldn't identify Ironically, even if you thought soldiers should be sent here, they are also being sent from Ohio, the only state that Even Trump's claim that Advertisement Trump is selling a dangerous lie about the city I've made a life in. My D.C. is one of Kimberly Atkins Stohr is a columnist for the Globe. She may be reached at
