COPAA and The Texas Organization of Parent Attorneys and Advocates (TOPAA) filed an amicus brief  in the 5^th Circuit in North East ISD v. I.M. on Friday, April 11, 2025. 

IDEA mandates that children with disabilities receive a FAPE tailored to their unique academic and functional needs. The Supreme Court in Endrew F. clarified that an Individualized Education Program (IEP) must be reasonably calculated to enable a child to make progress appropriate in light of the child’s circumstances. This standard requires ambitious and challenging goals, ensuring meaningful progress for students with disabilities, including functional goals critical to their educational advancement.

The factors used by the Fifth Circuit to evaluate FAPE compliance, as set forth in Cypress-Fairbanks Indep. Sch. Dist. v. Michael F., 118 F.3d 245 (5th Cir. 1997), must be applied in alignment with Endrew F.’s substantive standard. The first and fourth factors are in dispute in this case.  Specifically, the first factor must assess whether the IEP includes appropriately ambitious goals and challenging objectives tailored to the student’s unique circumstances. The fourth factor must evaluate whether the academic and non-academic benefits provided are sufficient in light of the child’s individual needs and potential for growth.  In this case, the intensity and frequency of services are at issue; the parents requested that ESY services be provided for a full school day during any break of three days or more whereas the school district proposed just six weeks of ESY services for four hours a day.   The parents were concerned that without more continuous education, their son regressed in the critical areas of toileting and elopement.  

For students like I.M., whose educational programming necessarily includes functional goals related to elopement and toileting, progress on these goals is critical. To provide FAPE, therefore, the IEP must appropriately address those needs. The district court correctly emphasized the importance of these functional goals, recognizing that ignoring them would undermine the individualized nature of I.M.’s IEP. 

The district court correctly determined that the Northeast Independent School District (NEISD or District) failed to provide a FAPE to I.M., a non-verbal autistic child receiving special education services in a self-contained life skills classroom, because I.M. was not progressing on functional goals. Amici supports the district court’s correct interpretation and application of the Endrew F. decision in this case, securing I.M.’s right to a FAPE.  

Selene Almazan, legal director and Amicus Co-Chairs, Catherine Merino Reisman and Ellen Saideman drafted and filed the brief in support of the parents. The parents are represented by COPAA member Yvonnilda Muniz.