Federal Regulations for Planning an Innovative Academic Institution

Introduction

In the United States workforce, there are regulations that exist for the sole purpose of controlling, directing, or managing an organizational structure, project, activity, and/or business system. Typically, these regulations consist of a set of rules/laws that must be followed to comply with a specific piece of government legislation. Federal regulations are usually enforced by a federal regulatory agency to ensure that the purpose or provisions of a legislative act are carried out by the educational facility’s site selection team. During the development of the long-term plan for creating a specific educational facility, the site selection educator must comprehensively detail specific actions to be carried out such as: 1) the examination of federal regulations affecting the planning of the new facility; 2) the appraisal of costs for complying with the regulatory requirements for existing structures; and 3) assigning clear directives for architects and educators during the management of the facility construction or acquisition program. That said, when planning the creation of an innovative academic institution, the educator and architect should be knowledgeable about all regulations to abide by all government statutes, provide accessibility to all areas of the building, and meet the needs of disabled and non-disabled students alike within the specified learning environment. 

Federal Regulations in Facility Planning

In larger organizational structures, the overall facility planning team is divided into distinct sectional groups – Site Selection & Land Acquisition, School Educational Programming, Maintenance & Operations, Supplies & Equipment, and Architecture & Construction Monitoring – to effectively manage the various disciplines associated with the facility planning effort. With respect to the scope of work for the Architecture & Construction group, there are three federal regulations that directly affect the educational facility planning process and must be thoroughly examined for compliance. In my opinion, these specific regulations are the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), and the Rehabilitation Act of 1973.

Individual with Disabilities Education Act

The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) doesn’t necessarily affect the physical structure itself; however, IDEA does dictate how disabled students ought to be treated within the least restrictive school environment. For example, Earthman (2013) states that

the least restrictive environment has been defined as any physical location in the building where the student can learn effectively with the least possible restraint. Usually, this means active association with other students, especially those without identified disabilities. For the most part, this usually means the regular classroom. There is also the proviso that the educational program must be of the same quality of instruction as for other students in the school. Specifically, the least restrictive environment means the student with a disability would be in the regular classroom as much time as would be beneficial (p. 142). 

The key takeaway of IDEA is that all students with disabilities be integrated into the regular classroom setting and guaranteed access to all educational programs.  

Americans with Disabilities Act

The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) addresses discriminatory actions that may be directed towards individuals with disabilities. The ADA prohibits any discrimination against disabled people in any organization that receives federal funding from the government. According to Earthman (2013), Title II of the ADA

extends the antidiscrimination provisions to all activities of the school system, as well as all other governmental bodies, regardless of the use of federal funds. This is the most far-reaching legislation within a series of legislation dealing with the rights of persons with disabilities. The ADA legislation is quite specific in requiring organizations, including public schools, to eliminate physical and communication barriers in buildings (p. 143).

In my research, I’ve uncovered multiple sources that offer additional content regarding the specific provisions of the ADA and the effect on the physical environment of the school system.

            Additionally, in my opinion, it should be noted that the ADA regulation contains requirements that may be perceived as contradictory to some organizational leaders. For example, Earthman (2013) states that

one section states that school systems must guarantee that individuals with disabilities are not excluded from services because the buildings are inaccessible and, in another section, states the school system need not remove physical barriers. The key provision here is that buildings do not need to be modified providing the programs, services, or activities are available in a location in the building that is accessible to students with disabilities. Further, school systems are not required to modify a building if such would cause an undue burden or financial hardship upon the school system. Perhaps the one requirement that may have impact upon school facilities is the one that requires that programs and services must be offered in an integrated setting (p. 144). 

Despite the confusing requirements of the ADA, the key takeaway is that all learning institutions’ activities, services, and programs be accessible to all disabled and non-disabled students alike without exclusion.

Rehabilitation Act of 1973

The Rehabilitation Act of 1973 contains two sections that specify facility planning requirements for disabled students. The first section is 502 which deals with the elimination of architectural obstructions in public schools. Further, this section of the Rehabilitation Act

requires the elimination of physical and communication barriers in all public buildings where federal funds are used. This, of course, includes all public schools. Elimination of physical and communication barriers means some standards have to be developed against which architects and educators can measure accessibility (Earthman, 2013, p. 141).

In my opinion, the overall goal of this section is to leverage all learning opportunities for students with learning disabilities to maximize their potential.

While section 502 mandates the elimination of architectural obstructions, section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act addresses facility planning for disabled persons. This section requires the accessibility of all services, activities, and programs for all students; however, this section doesn’t

guarantee that all students must have access to all parts of the school building. On the contrary, if part of the building is inaccessible, the program, service, or activity can be moved to a spot in the building where a student with disabilities can participate. This is an important concept for both educator and architect, especially in renovated buildings. Not all parts of the building must necessarily be accessible to comply with the provisions of Section 504” (Earthman, 2013, p. 140)

Costs of Federal Regulations Compliance

On the surface, the appraised costs associated with the compliance of Federal Regulations may appear to be a burdensome financial responsibility; however, these costs are insignificant considering the overall total costs of the facility project. According to Earthman (2013), the “provisions incur very little cost and should be included in the educational specifications for any new construction as well as any renovation, renewal, or modernization” (p. 146). In fact, the law also states that the removal of barriers ought to be readily achievable without undue financial hardship. In defining the term “readily achievable”, Earthman (2013) states that

the removal of the barrier can be easily accomplished and carried out with little difficulty or without great expense. The nature and cost of removing a barrier are the criteria to be used in making a decision regarding whether or not a project is readily achievable. The cost of removal, the ease or difficulty with which the project can be accomplished, and the overall financial resources of the school system come into play in making the final decision (p. 146).

In my opinion, whether the facility project is judged as being “readily achievable” or not, school systems are responsible for making programs and services accessible to disabled students which implies that the facility planner may use other creative means to improve accessibility and control costs.

Roles & Responsibilities Associated with Compliance

As previously stated, both educators and architects alike are responsible for being familiar with all legislative provisions that address discrimination issues associated with physical structures of the school project. As a managerial function of the facility plan, the school administrator is responsible for ensuring that the entire school system and hired architects adhere to the ADA regulations regarding all academic facilities. Further, architects are required to be well-informed of and up-to-date with all building codes and regulations to help educational planners comply with all regulatory requirements.  In fact, according to Earthman (2013), the “architect can be valuable in providing input into an alternative method of accessibility. The viability of the alternative method, however, is a decision of the school board based upon a recommendation of the educational planners and school administration” (p. 148). Having said, in my opinion, the educational planner, architect, and school administrator must all work together to identify and countermeasure all solvable barrier problems and seek alternative solutions for any irresolvable barrier-free environmental concerns.

D'uAndre A. Drain, Ed.D. is the Author of The Negative Perception Theory and Founder and Chief Executive Officer of Drain Corporation, LLC., a diversified services organization that provides products and services to help firms Achieve Strategic and Organizational Goals by Engaging the Talent and Passion of People?. Diversified services include, but are not limited to: Lean Six Sigma management; strategic & organizational management solutions; scholastic publication; and multi-media broadcasting.

References

ADA.gov. (n.d.). Retrieved May 14, 2021, from https://www.ada.gov/2010_regs.htm

Earthman, G. (2013). Planning Educational Facilities (4thEdition). Rowman and Littlefield Education. ISBN-13:978-1475801880