fast fives - Five Strategies for Identifying Effective Incentives and Sanctions to Support Compliance With IDEA and Improve Student Outcomes

Oct 15, 2026

A policy brief outlining how state educational agencies can design a progressive system of incentives and sanctions under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) to strengthen compliance and improve outcomes for students with disabilities. It explains how enforcement actions under OSEP State General Supervision responsibilities can be integrated with meaningful rewards, continuous escalation, and clear written procedures. The brief provides five actionable strategies, including meaningful incentive design, community engagement, aligned progressive enforcement, and data-driven evaluation to adjust over time.

LanguageEnglish

CategoryResearch & Report

FormatPDF

Pages6

Reading Time15 min

AccessFree to download

Overview

IDEA requirements and enforcement context

Continuum of incentives and sanctions

Five strategies

Use meaningful incentives and sanctions

Engage community partners

Include authentic stakeholder voices

Specify written policies and procedures

Be data driven

fast fives Five Strategies for Identifying Effective Incentives and Sanctions to Support Compliance With IDEA and Improve Student Outcomes The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) requires state educational agencies (SEAs) and local educational agencies (LEAs) to improve outcomes for children with disabilities and ensure compliance with the requirements of IDEA while following the Office of Management and Budget Uniform regulations (2 CFR Part 200) . SEAs have various policy tools available to them to help support these goals through a system of progressive incentives and sanctions. Sanctions include specific enforcement activities, as outlined in the Office of Special Education Program’s (OSEP) State General Supervision Responsibilities Under Parts B and C of the IDEA Monitoring, Technical Assistance, and Enforcement, QA 23-01. Section E of OSEP’s 23-01 provides states with the requirements for the use of enforcement actions or sanctions related to LEA annual determinationsand other circumstances (see Appendix A) . However, states have flexibility in creating a system of incentives and sanctions that is meaningful to their unique contexts while still including the required enforcement actions. States often use incentives and sanctions, usually along a continuum of increasing intensity, to influence LEA actions. Incentives or sanctions may be applied to LEAs in response to their performance on various IDEA accountability measures, including annual determinations, progress toward State Performance Plan/Annual Performance Report (SPP/APR) targets, the correction of noncompliance, response to monitoring findings, or the collection and analysis of data. States may also apply incentives and sanctions in response to their state accountability systems and related policies or regulations. SEAs typically offer LEAs incentives to encourage the use of compliant practices and/ or to support activities related to improving student outcomes. SEAs typically sanction LEAs in response to continued noncompliance or failure to make progress toward goals or state targets over time. This brief includes five strategies to help states effectively leverage incentivesand sanctions to support LEA compliance with IDEA and improve student outcomes. 1. Use meaningful incentivesand sanctions. States should aim to choose incentives and sanctions that effectively motivate LEAs to improve both outcomes and compliance. The incentives and sanctions used by a state should be meaningful to the LEAs so that LEAs are motivated to pursue those incentives or avoid sanctions. Historically, under IDEA, when states focus on noncompliance and ensure required corrective action, compliance rates tend to improve. However, data indicate that improving compliance does not always result in improved outcomes or performance for students with disabilities (to view historical trends in IDEA data, see [https://sites.ed.gov/](https://sites.ed.gov/)[ ](https://sites.ed.gov/)[idea/data/](idea/data/)) . Therefore, thinking about a continuum that includes both meaningful rewards and sanctions may serve as an effective lever to improve educational outcomes. The continuum of incentives and Fast fives | Five Strategies for Identifying Effective Incentives and Sanctions to Support Compliance With IDEA and Improve Student Outcomes | NCSI 2024 | fast fives

| | | | | | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | | sanctions may comprise economic, social, or moral motivators.(See Appendix B for examples of incentives and sanctions.)
The continuum of incentives and sanctions a state develops typically applies to all aspects of IDEA general supervision, including child/ student outcomes, monitoring, fiscal oversight, dispute resolution, and data. The policies and procedures developed regarding incentivesand sanctions should describe and specify what incentives and sanctions to use and when to use them (see Strategy 4) . All tools or levers across the cont

FAQs

What is the purpose of incentives and sanctions under IDEA in this brief?

To help states improve compliance with IDEA requirements while also supporting better educational outcomes for students with disabilities.

How can sanctions and incentives be structured to be effective for LEAs?

By using a meaningful continuum that motivates LEAs to pursue compliant practices and avoid ongoing noncompliance, with escalation over time.

What role does data play in the incentive and sanction system?

States should collect and analyze data to determine when and how to apply incentives and sanctions, review impact, set priorities, and adjust based on effectiveness over time.

Oct 15, 2026

Uploaded by Jordan Avery