Section G. Dispute Resolution - Inform, Explain and Support: Resolving Conflicts before They Rise to the Level of a Dispute

Sep 2, 2026

Upload by Bintang

Section G outlines how State educational agencies develop and implement dispute resolution procedures under the McKinney-Vento Act for homeless children and youth. It explains that many conflicts stem from SEA or LEA actions that do not fully align with the law, emphasizing mediation requirements and the need for compliance in the EHCY program. The section also presents a dispute “continuum” covering prevention, covered complaints, and matters addressed by other legislation, and describes drivers behind increasing disputes, such as awareness, economic pressures, and shifting accountability.

LanguageEnglish

CategoryGeneral

FormatDOCX

Pages28

Reading Time10 min

AccessFree to download

Section G. Dispute Resolution

G.1 Introduction

G.2 Inform, Explain and Support: Resolving Conflicts before They Rise to the Level of a Dispute

Section G. Dispute Resolution G.1 Introduction The McKinney-Vento Act requires that State educational agencies (SEAs) develop a dispute resolution policy as part of the State Plan, which must include “[a] description of procedures for the prompt resolution of disputes regarding the educational placement of homeless children and youths” [42 U.S.C. § 11432(g)(1)(C]. The law requires local homeless liaisons to ensure that disputes are mediated in accordance with the State’s dispute procedures [42 U.S.C. § 11432(g)(6)(A)(vii)]. Section G of the State Coordinators’ Handbook offers State Coordinators a menu of options for developing and implementing an effective dispute resolution process based on the experiences of colleagues over the past decade. Furthermore, taking a broad perspective on conflict, this section explores additional best practices that State Coordinators can employ to ensure effective compliance and implementation of the McKinney-Vento Act. Because many disputes occur over SEA or local educational agency (LEA) actions that do not align with the law, making sure that SEAs and LEAs operate their Education for Homeless Children and Youth (EHCY) program in full compliance is a primary means of avoiding disputes. While resolving disputes is required, not all disagreements are covered by the dispute resolution process. Therefore, Section G offers a continuum for resolving conflicts including proactive strategies to avoid or reduce conflicts, complaints not covered by the dispute resolution process, and issues that require the use of dispute processes in other legislation, as well as those clearly covered by formal McKinney-Vento resolution requirements. The section will clearly distinguish the legal requirements, current U. S. Department of Education (ED) guidance, and best practices supported by the field. Communication is not a perfect science. Words may have multiple meanings, and multiple perspectives on an issue can result in multiple interpretations. It is not surprising that our laws, being composed of words, are subject to the disagreements and conflict that result from such imperfection. Revisions to legislation, issuance of guidance and regulation, and case law are some of the ways we attempt to add clarity to the words of our laws. Conflict is normal in life and law; how we respond is key. This is no less true when working on behalf of students experiencing homelessness under the McKinney-Vento Act. State Coordinators have seen an increase in the number of disputes over the years and have identified the following possible explanations for in the increase: greater parental awareness of their children’s educational rights under the McKinney-Vento Act due to appropriate outreach by schools; economic factors that have led to increasing numbers of children identified as experiencing homelessness, increasing durations of homelessness for children, and decreasing funding for schools. State Coordinators have observed increasing needs in a climate of decreasing resources. For example, as LEAs struggle financially to provide services to homeless students, schools are more likely to question a family’s eligibility for McKinney-Vento services or school of origin placement, which usually includes the LEA providing transportation, when a family has been doubled up for multiple years. Subsequently, the parent or guardian may initiate a dispute. In addition, increasing accountability for student achievement creates further potential for conflict. Some schools may be more reluctant to enroll students they perceive to be academically at-risk, and in some cases parents may claim homelessness to access schools they perceive as better for their children. Furthermore, funding and accountability can lead to inter-district disagreements related to serving homeless students. The increase in disagreements has led to State Coordinators spending more time dealing with disputes. This document attempts to capture promising practices that

FAQs

What does the McKinney-Vento Act require states to include in their dispute resolution policy?

State educational agencies must develop a dispute resolution policy as part of the State Plan, including procedures for the prompt resolution of disputes about educational placement for homeless children and youth.

How are local disputes expected to be handled under the law?

Local homeless liaisons must ensure disputes are mediated according to the state’s dispute procedures, consistent with the McKinney-Vento requirements.

What practices does Section G recommend for resolving conflicts before they become formal disputes?

Section G emphasizes prevention strategies such as training local liaisons, conducting proactive identification, and helping families understand their educational rights to reduce misunderstandings and adversarial escalation.

Sep 2, 2026

Upload by Bintang