My Child Isn't Making Progress But the School Says the IEP Is Fine
If your child is not making meaningful academic progress but the school keeps saying the IEP is appropriate, you have rights. The U.S. Supreme Court has held that an IEP must be reasonably calculated to enable progress — not merely provide access to services.
Page Information
Jurisdiction: Federal IDEA + California special education law
Reviewed: Pending expert review
This page is informational but is still being reviewed by a special education expert. Some details may change.
My Child Isn't Making Progress But the School Says the IEP Is Fine
Your child has had an IEP for years. The school provides services. Meetings happen. Reports come home. But when you look at the actual data -- the test scores, the reading level, the writing samples, the report cards -- your child is not meaningfully improving. They are treading water. Or sinking. And when you raise this at the IEP meeting, the team says: "The IEP is appropriate. We're providing services. Your child is making progress."
You know better. And the United States Supreme Court agrees with you.
Quick Answer
An IEP that does not produce meaningful progress is not legally appropriate -- no matter how many services are listed on the page. In Endrew F. v. Douglas County School District, 580 U.S. 386 (2017), the Supreme Court unanimously held that an IEP must be "reasonably calculated to enable a child to make progress appropriate in light of the child's circumstances." This is not a rubber stamp. If your child has had the same reading goal for three years and has not met it, if the gap between your child and peers is growing, if the progress reports say "making progress" but the data says otherwise -- the IEP is failing the Endrew F. standard, and the district has a legal obligation to change course.
What Endrew F. Actually Requires
Before 2017, many districts interpreted to require only "some educational benefit" -- a floor so low it was barely above nothing. The Supreme Court rejected that standard entirely.
Chief Justice Roberts, writing for a unanimous Court:
"A school must offer an IEP reasonably calculated to enable a child to make progress appropriate in light of the child's circumstances."
The Court explained that this requires more than a "merely more than de minimis" benefit. The IEP must be "appropriately ambitious in light of [the child's] circumstances." For a child being educated in a general education classroom, progress must be "generally" commensurate with that of non-disabled peers. For a child with more significant disabilities, the IEP must still be ambitiously designed to provide meaningful benefit -- even if progress toward grade-level standards is not realistic.
Tip
The Endrew F. standard shifts the burden of proof in practice. When a child has been receiving services for years without meaningful progress, the question is no longer "Is the district providing something?" but "Is what the district is providing working?" If the answer is no, the IEP must change. The district cannot keep doing the same thing year after year and call it appropriate.
How to Tell the IEP Is Not Working
Look for these specific warning signs:
Goals carry forward year after year without being met. If your child had a goal of reading 90 words per minute in 2023, the same goal in 2024, and the same goal again in 2025 -- and still has not achieved it -- the intervention is not working. An appropriate IEP adjusts when progress stalls.
Progress reports are vague or meaningless. A progress report that says "making progress" or "partially meeting goal" without data is useless. You need: Where was the child at baseline? Where are they now? What is the rate of progress? At this rate, will they meet the goal by the end of the year? If the school cannot answer these questions, they are not meaningfully monitoring progress.
The gap between your child and peers is growing. Your child gained 5 words per minute in reading fluency this year. Peers gained 30. Your child is further behind now than they were a year ago in relative terms. This is the opposite of what IDEA requires.
Standardized test scores contradict progress reports. The IEP says "making progress on reading goal." The state assessment shows reading three grade levels below. Something does not add up, and the state assessment is the more objective measure.
Services have not changed despite stagnation. Your child has received 30 minutes of pull-out reading instruction twice a week for four years. Reading has not improved. No one has proposed a different approach, a different methodology, more time, a different provider, or a different setting. That is a failure of the IEP process.
Goals are written below what the child can already do. If your child currently reads at 75 words per minute and the IEP goal is 80 words per minute, that goal is not "appropriately ambitious." It is designed to be easy to report as "met" -- not to produce meaningful growth.
What the District Might Say -- And How to Respond
"Your child IS making progress -- just slowly." Ask: "Compared to what? The Supreme Court held in Endrew F. that progress must be 'appropriate in light of the child's circumstances.' Is this rate of progress appropriate for a child with [child's] cognitive ability and disability? At this rate, how long will it take to close the gap -- or will the gap continue to grow? If the current approach will never close the gap, the IEP is not reasonably calculated."
"We're providing the services listed in the IEP." Respond: "Providing services is not the same as providing FAPE. FAPE requires that the services actually produce appropriate progress. If a doctor prescribes a medication and it isn't working, the doctor changes the prescription -- they don't keep prescribing the same thing and call it appropriate care. The standard is outcomes, not inputs."
"This is the best we can do given your child's disability." Respond: "Endrew F. rejected the idea that any amount of progress is sufficient. The Court said the IEP must be 'appropriately ambitious.' Has the team considered different methodologies, increased service intensity, a different provider, additional related services, or a different placement? If not, you haven't determined what the best approach is -- you've just continued with the current one."
"Your child has a significant disability. We can't expect grade-level progress." Respond: "The Endrew F. Court specifically addressed this. Even when grade-level progress is not realistic, the IEP must still be designed to provide meaningful progress in light of the child's circumstances. Stagnation is never acceptable, regardless of disability severity."
"We need more time." Ask: "How much time? The current approach has been in place for [X years]. What specific change is the team proposing that will produce different results? If the answer is 'no change,' then more time with the same approach will produce the same inadequate results."
What to Do Now
- Request all progress monitoring data immediately. Send a written request to the Special Education Director: "I am requesting all progress monitoring data collected for [Child's Name]'s current IEP goals for the [current year] school year, including baseline data, all data points collected, and graphs or charts showing the trajectory of progress. Please provide this within 5 business days." You need the actual numbers -- not just the summary on the progress report.
- Compare the data to the goals. For each IEP goal, answer: What was the baseline? What is the target? Where is the child now? Is the child on track to meet the goal? If the child has had this goal for multiple years, pull the data from prior years too. Create a timeline.
- Check whether goals are measurable and ambitious. A goal must include: a specific skill, a measurable standard, a condition under which performance will be measured, and a target date. "Will improve reading" is not a goal. "Will read connected text at 110 correct words per minute with 95% accuracy by [date]" is a goal. If goals are vague, they cannot be monitored, and the IEP is deficient.
- Request an IEP meeting to review progress. Put it in writing and cite the legal standard: "I am requesting an IEP team meeting under IDEA Section 300.324(a)(4) to review [Child's Name]'s progress data and discuss whether the current IEP is reasonably calculated to enable progress appropriate in light of [his/her/their] circumstances, as required by the Supreme Court's decision in Endrew F. v. Douglas County School District, 580 U.S. 386 (2017)." The district must schedule the meeting within 30 days in California.
- At the meeting, ask these questions on the record. For each goal: "Is [child] on track to meet this goal? If not, what change to services, methodology, or intensity does the team propose?" For the IEP overall: "Given the progress data, does the team believe this IEP is reasonably calculated to enable appropriate progress under Endrew F.? If so, what evidence supports that conclusion?"
- Request an Independent Educational Evaluation (IEE). If the school's evaluation does not adequately explain why your child is not progressing -- or if you disagree with the school's assessment of current levels of performance -- request an IEE at district expense under IDEA Section 300.502. A private evaluator can assess your child's current skills, identify why the current approach is not working, and recommend specific evidence-based methodologies.
- Document everything for a potential compensatory education claim. If your child has been receiving an inadequate IEP for years, you may be entitled to -- make-up services to put your child in the position they would have been in if the IEP had been appropriate all along. Save every progress report, every IEP, every report card, and every standardized test score. This timeline is your evidence.
- If the district refuses to change course, pursue dispute resolution. File a compliance complaint with CDE (free, 60-day timeline) or request due process through OAH. Lack of progress under an unchanged IEP is one of the strongest claims you can bring, especially post-Endrew F.
Letter Demanding IEP Revision Based on Lack of Meaningful Progress
Dear [Special Education Director's Name],
Re: [Child's Full Name], DOB: [Date of Birth], [School Name]
I am writing to request an immediate IEP team meeting for my child, [Child's Name], based on [his/her/their] failure to make meaningful progress under the current IEP.
The progress data does not support the current IEP.
[Be specific with data -- e.g.:
- "[Child's Name] has had a reading fluency goal of [X] correct words per minute for the past [3] years. According to the most recent progress report ([date]), [he/she/they] is currently at [Y] words per minute -- [unchanged from / below] [his/her/their] baseline of [Z] words per minute established in [year]."
- "On the [state assessment name] administered in [month/year], [Child's Name] scored at the [X] percentile in [reading/math], which represents [no change / a decline] from the [Y] percentile in [prior year]. The gap between [Child's Name] and grade-level peers is widening."
- "[Child's Name]'s IEP goals in [area] have been essentially the same for [X] consecutive years without being achieved. The team has not proposed changes to the services, methodology, or intensity during this period."]
The legal standard requires more.
In Endrew F. v. Douglas County School District, 580 U.S. 386 (2017), the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously held that an IEP must be "reasonably calculated to enable a child to make progress appropriate in light of the child's circumstances." The Court rejected the "merely more than de minimis" standard and held that the IEP must be "appropriately ambitious." The data described above suggests that [Child's Name]'s current IEP does not meet this standard.
I am requesting:
-
An IEP team meeting within 30 days to review all progress monitoring data and determine what changes to goals, services, methodology, service intensity, and/or placement are necessary to produce meaningful progress.
-
That the school bring to the meeting: (a) all progress monitoring data for all current IEP goals, including baseline data, every data point collected, and trend analysis; (b) standardized assessment results from the current and prior year; and (c) an explanation of what evidence-based methodologies are currently being used and what alternatives are available.
-
That the team consider whether the current service model -- [describe current services, e.g., "30 minutes of pull-out reading instruction twice per week"] -- is sufficient to address [Child's Name]'s needs, or whether increased frequency, duration, intensity, or a different methodology is required.
[Optional: "I am also requesting an Independent Educational Evaluation at district expense under IDEA Section 300.502, as I disagree with the district's most recent evaluation dated [date], which I believe does not adequately assess [Child's Name]'s current level of functioning or explain the lack of progress."]
[Optional: "I am also requesting that the team discuss compensatory education for the period during which [Child's Name] has been receiving an IEP that has not produced appropriate progress. Under IDEA, compensatory education is available as a remedy when FAPE has been denied."]
Please confirm the meeting date within 10 business days.
Sincerely, [Your Name] [Your Address] [Your Email] [Your Phone Number] [Today's Date]
cc: [Principal's Name]
Learn More
- IEP Basics -- What an IEP must contain and how it should work
- Compensatory Education -- Make-up services when FAPE has been denied
- Independent Educational Evaluations -- Your right to a second evaluation at district expense
- Dispute Resolution Options -- How to file complaints, request mediation, or pursue due process
- The District Is Ignoring Our Private Evaluation -- When you have data the district won't consider
When to get one-on-one help from an advocate or attorney
Consider contacting an advocate or attorney if any of these apply:
- The district fails to respond to your assessment request within 15 days, misses the 60-day assessment deadline, or repeatedly refuses requests you've made in writing.
- Your child is losing instruction time, being disciplined frequently, or showing significant regression.
- The district wants to move your child to a different school or classroom against your wishes, or you are preparing for mediation or due process.