The Most Common IEP Red Flags (and How to Avoid Them)

If you write IEPs, you already know the feeling of handing one off and wondering what a reviewer, a parent advocate, or a hearing officer might catch. This is a plain-language list of the issues that come up most often, with quick fixes you can apply before the meeting. It is written for special-education teachers and case managers who do the actual drafting. Every item on this list is one I either wrote myself early on or caught in someone else's draft later, so consider it a shortcut past a few years of learning it the slow way.

A quick note before we taxi out. This is general information to help you write clearer documents, not legal advice. For any question about compliance in your district or state, check with your special-education administrator or counsel.

Goals that are not measurable

This is the red flag reviewers catch first, because it is the easiest to spot. IDEA requires annual goals to be measurable, which means a person reading the goal should be able to tell, without guessing, whether the student met it.

Vague goals lean on words like "improve," "increase," or "better" with nothing to anchor them. Strong goals name the behavior, the condition, the criterion, and how you will measure it.

Weaker version:

Marcus will improve his reading comprehension.

There is no baseline, no target, and no way to score it. Two teachers could disagree about whether he met it.

Improved version:

Given a grade-level passage and five comprehension questions, Marcus will answer at least 4 of 5 questions correctly across three consecutive sessions, as measured by teacher-scored comprehension checks.

Now anyone can score it. The condition, the target, and the measurement are all on the page.

Present levels that do not connect to the goals

Your present levels of academic achievement and functional performance, the PLAAFP, are supposed to be the launch point for everything that follows. A common red flag is a PLAAFP that lists scores and labels but never explains what the student can and cannot do right now, or that describes a need the goals never address.

Watch for two mismatches. First, a PLAAFP that is all numbers and no baseline. Saying a student "scored in the 12th percentile" tells a reviewer very little about daily performance. Add the concrete baseline: "currently solves single-digit addition problems with 60 percent accuracy using a number line." Second, a need that appears in present levels but vanishes from the goals. If you write that a student struggles to organize materials and turn in work, but no goal touches that, a reviewer will notice the gap. Every documented need should connect to a goal, a service, an accommodation, or a clear note explaining why it is not being addressed this year.

Accommodations that are not specific or actually deliverable

Accommodations are where good intentions turn into vague promises. "Extended time" sounds fine until someone asks how much, on which tasks, and who provides it.

Weaker version:

Provide extended time and preferential seating as needed.

"As needed" puts the decision in limbo, and "preferential" means different things to different people. A substitute reading this would not know what to do.

Improved version:

Up to time and a half on tests and quizzes in all content areas. Seating within the first two rows, away from the classroom door, to reduce visual distraction.

Specific accommodations protect the student and protect you, because they describe something that can actually be delivered and verified.

Specially designed instruction that just names a program

Specially designed instruction, or SDI, describes how you adapt content, methodology, or delivery for this student. A frequent red flag is an SDI section that simply names a curriculum or program and stops there. The program name alone does not show how instruction is individualized.

Name the program if you use one, but make sure the instructional design is on the page: the adaptation, the grouping, the frequency, and the support. Instead of "Student will receive the reading program," describe what the student receives: "Explicit, systematic phonics instruction delivered in a small group of no more than four, with multisensory letter-sound drills and immediate corrective feedback, four times per week." That tells the next teacher how to keep the instruction consistent.

Progress notes that do not show real progress

Progress reporting is where IEPs quietly fall apart. A red flag here is a progress note that repeats the same phrase every quarter, "making progress" or "working toward goal," without data tied to the goal's criterion.

If the goal says "4 of 5 comprehension questions across three consecutive sessions," the progress note should report against that. For example: "Currently answering 3 of 5 questions correctly, has not yet reached three consecutive sessions at criterion." That sentence shows the trajectory and signals early whether the goal needs a revisit. Copy-pasted optimism does not.

Boilerplate and copy-paste leftovers

The last red flag is the human one. When you reuse a strong IEP as a starting point, traces of the previous student can ride along: a stray pronoun, a wrong grade level, a goal about a skill this student already has. Reviewers and parents do notice another child's name or a service that does not match the rest of the document. Before you finalize, read the IEP straight through as if you have never seen it, watching specifically for names, pronouns, grade levels, and dates that do not belong.

Your quick pre-flight checklist

Run through these before any IEP leaves your desk:

• Every annual goal has a baseline, a clear target, a condition, and a measurement method.
• The PLAAFP describes current performance in plain terms, and every documented need connects to something later in the document.
• Accommodations name the amount, the setting, and who delivers them, with no "as needed" left undefined.
• SDI describes the instructional design, not just a program name.
• Progress notes report data against each goal's actual criterion.
• A clean read-through caught any leftover names, pronouns, grades, or dates from a reused template.

If you want a second set of eyes before the meeting, IEP Pre-Flight lets you paste a draft goal, PLAAFP, accommodation, SDI statement, or progress note and flags what is vague, missing, or unmeasurable so you can fix it first. Either way, the habit of reading your own draft like a reviewer would is the single best way to clear these red flags before they ever get caught.