Eligibility Decision Support — Texas IDEA Categories

Specific Learning Disability — TAC §89.1040(c)(10)

SLD means a disorder in one or more basic psychological processes involved in understanding or using language — spoken or written — that may manifest as an impaired ability to listen, think, speak, read, write, spell, or do mathematical calculations. In Texas, SLD is identified through one of three approved approaches. Texas prioritizes the PSW approach per TEA SLD Guidance 2025.

Step 1 — Choose Identification Approach

🔍 Texas-Approved SLD Identification Approaches

⭐ Preferred in Texas

PSW — Patterns of Strengths & Weaknesses

Documents a cognitive processing weakness + academic achievement weakness + adequate cognitive strengths. C-SEP (Schultz & Stephens) is the Texas-developed PSW model. XBA (Cross-Battery Assessment, Flanagan) is also accepted.

RTI / MTSS

Response to Intervention

Insufficient response to high-quality, evidence-based tiered interventions. Requires documented intervention fidelity data, progress monitoring, and team determination that RTI data supports SLD identification.

Also PSW-based

C-SEP (Schultz & Stephens)

Texas-developed PSW model integrating cognitive processing, academic achievement, and ecological/functional data. Explicit data collection protocol with structured team decision framework.

Step 2 — Core Criteria Checklist

Step 3 — Exclusionary Factors

⚠️ SLD Must NOT Be Primarily Caused By…

Intellectual DisabilityCognitive profile consistent with ID (GIA/FSIQ < 70 with adaptive behavior deficits) — see ID tab instead

Visual / Hearing / Motor ImpairmentUncorrected sensory or physical impairment is the primary cause — document screening results

Emotional DisabilityIf ED is the primary cause of academic difficulty, SLD is not identified. Student CAN have both — see ED/SLD Differentiation reference

Cultural / Environmental FactorsLimited English proficiency, environmental disadvantage, or cultural differences are the primary explanatory factor — document bilingual/EB context

Limited English ProficiencyAcademic difficulties are primarily attributable to language difference rather than a processing-based disorder — conduct bilingual evaluation if indicated

Lack of Appropriate InstructionStudent has not received adequate, evidence-based instruction in reading and/or math — document instructional history and RTI data

For each exclusionary factor, the team must document that it has been ruled out as the primary cause — not merely that it exists. A student can have co-occurring factors (e.g., bilingual + SLD) if the processing data supports the SLD identification independent of the factor.

Research note on EB referral timing: A 2026 nationally representative longitudinal study (Ortiz & Chow, Research in Special Education) found that emergent bilinguals are systematically underidentified in early elementary and overidentified in 3rd–5th grade — a pattern driven largely by delayed referrals rather than by actual disability prevalence changes. Ruling out LEP as the primary cause does not require waiting for English proficiency — it requires appropriate bilingual evaluation. Early evaluation with bilingual-appropriate tools is the correct response to early signs of disability, not postponement.

Dyslexia & Dysgraphia Pattern Recognition

📖

Dyslexia Pattern

Texas Dyslexia Handbook — name the pattern explicitly

Basic Reading Skills Low or Very Low (SS ≤ 85)

Phonological Awareness below average (CTOPP-2 PA composite, WJ-V Phonological Awareness)

Rapid Automatized Naming below average (CTOPP-2 RSN/RNSN composites)

Phonological Memory below average (CTOPP-2 PM composite)

Reading Fluency below average — fluency affected in addition to accuracy

If Basic Reading Skills + phonological processing weaknesses are both present, the narrative must state this pattern is "consistent with characteristics of dyslexia as described in the Texas Dyslexia Handbook." Do not diagnose — name the pattern.

⚠️ Note on definitions: Texas currently maintains two parallel dyslexia definitions — the TEA Dyslexia Handbook definition (phonological basis, consistent with IDA) and TEC §38.003 (broader "disorder of constitutional origin"). A 2025 peer-reviewed analysis of TEA guidance documents (Pater-Rov, 2025) recommends TEA consolidate dyslexia under the SLD framework and remove the IDA definition from TEA policy to reduce confusion. This hub reflects current TEA practice; be aware the field is actively debating whether these frameworks should be unified.

✏️

Dysgraphia Pattern

Texas Dyslexia Handbook — name the pattern explicitly

Spelling Low or Very Low (SS ≤ 85)

Orthographic Processing below average (TOC composites ≤ scaled 7, WIAT-IV Orthographic Fluency)

Written expression / written fluency below average

Graphomotor concerns noted — handwriting automaticity or letter formation difficulties documented

If spelling + orthographic processing are both below average, state the pattern is "consistent with characteristics of dysgraphia." If Basic Reading Skills are ALSO low, the combined pattern is "consistent with characteristics of dyslexia" — name both.

Intellectual Disability — TAC §89.1040(c)(5)

ID requires three concurrent criteria: (1) significantly below-average intellectual functioning, (2) significant deficits in adaptive behavior, and (3) adverse educational impact. Both cognitive AND adaptive behavior must be documented — adaptive behavior is not optional. The diagnostician administers the cognitive and adaptive behavior measures; the full team makes the eligibility determination.

Criterion 1 — Intellectual Functioning

🧠 Significantly Below-Average Intellectual Functioning

Score	Battery	Threshold for ID Consideration
GIA (General Intellectual Ability)	WJ-V COG	SS ≤ 70 (approximately 2 SD below mean)
FSIQ (Full Scale IQ)	WISC-V	SS ≤ 70
MPI (Mental Processing Index)	KABC-II	SS ≤ 70
FCI (Fluid-Crystallized Index)	KABC-II	SS ≤ 70 (use MPI for bilingual students — reduced Gc loading)
NVI (Nonverbal Index)	KABC-II	Consider for students with significant language differences — interpret with caution

⚠️ Texas does not use a strict ≤70 cutoff as the sole criterion. The score must be interpreted in context — measurement error (SEM), confidence intervals, and clinical observations all inform the determination. A FSIQ of 71–75 with significant adaptive deficits and functional impairment may still qualify; a FSIQ of 65 without adaptive deficits does not.

📊

Cognitive Criteria Checklist

Global composite (GIA / FSIQ / MPI) is SS ≤ 70 or within the range with SEM considered

Score reflects a global, consistent pattern of low performance — not a specific processing weakness with strengths elsewhere

Results are considered valid and representative — behavioral observations support test validity; effort and engagement were adequate

Bilingual/EB considerations addressed — KABC-II MPI or NVI used if significant language difference is a factor

Scores have been reviewed in the context of prior evaluation data — consistent low pattern over time, not a sudden drop

🏠

Criterion 2 — Adaptive Behavior

ABAS-3 or comparable measure — REQUIRED

ABAS-3 (or equivalent) administered with both Parent and Teacher informants

GAC (General Adaptive Composite) is SS ≤ 70 on at least one informant form

Deficits are present across at least two adaptive skill areas (Conceptual, Social, Practical)

Adaptive deficits are consistent across settings — home and school informants both reflect concern

Adaptive deficits are not better explained by environmental deprivation or lack of opportunity

ABAS-3 Domain	Threshold
GAC (General Adaptive Composite)	SS ≤ 70 — primary indicator
Conceptual (Con)	SS ≤ 70 — language, academics, self-direction
Social (Soc)	SS ≤ 70 — leisure, social interaction
Practical (Prac)	SS ≤ 70 — self-care, home/school living, safety

🏫

Criterion 3 — Adverse Educational Impact

Intellectual and adaptive deficits adversely affect educational performance across academic and functional domains

Functional/academic impact is documented with grades, teacher reports, classroom observations, and CBM data

Student requires significantly modified curriculum and instruction — not simply accommodations to grade-level content

⚠️ Do NOT identify ID based on cognitive scores alone. Both cognitive AND adaptive behavior criteria must be met concurrently. A student with low cognitive scores but average adaptive behavior does NOT meet ID criteria.

⚠️

ID Exclusionary & Differentiation

Rule out / differentiate from:

SLD: SLD shows a specific processing weakness with intact strengths; ID shows a global, pervasive low pattern across all cognitive areas

Language difference (bilingual/EB): language-mediated tasks may be suppressed; use KABC-II MPI/NVI or nonverbal measures to isolate language from reasoning

Developmental delay (younger students): distinguish from ID — younger students may not yet meet the pervasiveness and consistency threshold

Validity concerns: low motivation, emotional factors, or health issues on testing day may suppress scores — document behavioral observations and consider retesting if warranted

Other Health Impairment / ADHD — TAC §89.1040(c)(7)

OHI means having limited strength, vitality, or alertness — including a heightened alertness to environmental stimuli — that results in limited alertness with respect to the educational environment. ADHD is the most common condition qualifying under OHI in school settings. The diagnostician's role is to document the educational impact through behavioral rating scales and evaluation data; a physician provides the medical documentation of the health condition.

🩺

Medical Documentation

Must be provided by a licensed physician

Written medical statement from a licensed physician documenting ADHD (or other health condition)

Medical documentation specifies the type of ADHD (Predominantly Inattentive, Predominantly Hyperactive-Impulsive, or Combined Presentation)

Diagnosis was made based on DSM-5 criteria — symptoms present in multiple settings, onset before age 12, duration ≥ 6 months

⚠️ Educational eligibility under OHI does NOT require ADHD medication. The health condition must affect educational performance — medical management status is separate from eligibility determination.

📋

Behavioral Rating Scale Data

Conners-4 — cross-informant pattern is critical

Conners-4 administered with Parent, Teacher, and Self-Report (SR for students 8+) informants

ADHD Inattention, Hyperactivity, or combined scales elevated (T ≥ 65 Elevated; T ≥ 70 Very Elevated) on at least one informant

Cross-informant pattern analyzed and documented — consistent vs. discrepant findings across raters

Emotional Dysregulation, Executive Functioning, and School Problems scales reviewed for educational impact specificity

Conners-4 T-Score	Classification
T ≥ 70	Very Elevated — clinically significant concern
T 65–69	Elevated — significant concern
T 60–64	High Average — above average, monitor
T 40–59	Average range
T < 40	Low — below average (fewer concerns reported)

🎯

"Limited Alertness" Standard

The educational threshold for OHI

Document "limited alertness" in the educational environment

Attention difficulties result in reduced time on task, missed instruction, or incomplete work in the classroom

Difficulties are pervasive across academic settings and tasks — not limited to one subject, teacher, or context

Behavioral observations during evaluation note attention, impulsivity, or activity level concerns consistent with rating scale data

Classroom data (grades, CBM, teacher records) document inconsistent performance, incomplete assignments, or academic underachievement tied to attention

The attention difficulties are not better explained by anxiety, trauma, or another primary disability that is the actual driver of inattention

OHI eligibility requires the health condition to adversely affect educational performance — a medical ADHD diagnosis alone is not sufficient. The team must document the educational impact.

🔗

Adverse Educational Impact

Academic performance (grades, CBMs) is below expected level given cognitive ability — unexplained by instruction quality

Teacher reports and observations document functional impairment in the classroom — not just a high activity level or personality trait

Student requires specially designed instruction or supports beyond typical accommodations to access the curriculum

ADHD/OHI + co-occurring SLD considered: if both processing deficits AND attention concerns are present, evaluate for dual eligibility (OHI + SLD)

If ADHD is documented but academic performance and functional impairment are within normal limits — student may qualify for a 504 plan rather than special education under OHI. Document the team's reasoning either way.

Collaborative Eligibility Categories

For these categories, the eligibility determination belongs to the multidisciplinary team — the diagnostician contributes cognitive and achievement data, documents educational impact, and collaborates with the specialist who owns the primary evaluation (LSSP, SLP, VI specialist, audiologist, etc.). Each card below summarizes the diagnostician's role and what data to bring to the team.

😔

Emotional Disability (ED)

TAC §89.1040(c)(2)

▼

Primary evaluator: LSSP (psychological evaluation) in most districts. Some districts assign the diagnostician depending on local practice. Always clarify team roles at the onset of referral.

What the Diagnostician Brings Cognitive assessment data (processing profile, ruling out ID), academic achievement documentation, CBM and classroom performance data, behavioral rating scales (Conners-4) documenting cross-setting emotional/behavioral concerns. Key ED/SLD Differentiation Question Is the emotional disability the primary cause of academic difficulty — or is there an independent SLD present? See the ED/SLD Differentiation tab in the Behavior & FBA Reference. Document which pattern applies: ED exclusionary, ED contributing, or concurrent ED+SLD. Texas ED Criteria (5 characteristics — must show ≥1) Inability to learn not explained by intellectual/sensory/health factors; inability to build/maintain satisfactory relationships with peers and teachers; inappropriate behavior or feelings under normal circumstances; pervasive unhappiness or depression; tendency to develop physical symptoms or fears associated with school. Must be present over a long period of time, to a marked degree, and adversely affect educational performance.

🧩

Autism (AU)

TAC §89.1040(c)(1)

▼

Primary evaluator: LSSP (psychological evaluation including autism-specific instruments — ADOS-2, ADI-R, GARS). SLP often involved for communication assessment.

What the Diagnostician Brings Cognitive assessment (WJ-V COG, WISC-V, or KABC-II — important for identifying uneven cognitive profiles common in AU), academic achievement across all domains, adaptive behavior (ABAS-3), and classroom observation of communication, social engagement, and behavioral flexibility. Key Considerations AU + SLD co-occurrence is common — a student with autism may also have processing deficits in phonological awareness, working memory, or written expression that warrant SLD identification. Document the independent processing/achievement data to support or rule out co-occurring SLD.

🗣️

Speech/Language Impairment (SI)

TAC §89.1040(c)(11)

▼

Primary evaluator: Speech-Language Pathologist (SLP). SLP conducts and owns the speech/language evaluation and eligibility determination.

What the Diagnostician Brings Oral language scores from achievement batteries (WJ-V Oral Language cluster, WIAT-IV Oral Language, KTEA-3 Oral Language) provide context for academic impact; cognitive data contextualizes the language findings. Diagnostician does not conduct the speech/language evaluation — shares relevant data with the SLP. Key Consideration Distinguish SI from SLD — Oral Expression and Listening Comprehension are SLD academic areas, but a student with primary speech/language impairment may qualify under SI rather than (or in addition to) SLD. Coordinate with SLP to avoid duplication and ensure the right eligibility category is applied.

👁️

Visual Impairment (VI)

TAC §89.1040(c)(13)

▼

Primary evaluator: Licensed VI specialist / Teacher of the Visually Impaired (TVI). Clinical vision evaluation by licensed eye care professional required.

What the Diagnostician Brings Cognitive data using measures not dependent on visual acuity (verbal subtests, auditory processing measures); academic achievement with testing accommodations as appropriate. Screen documentation — verify vision was screened and results are on record. VI is an exclusionary factor for SLD — document that visual impairment has been ruled out or appropriately accounted for before SLD identification.

👂

Hearing Impairment (HI)

TAC §89.1040(c)(4)

▼

Primary evaluator: Licensed Audiologist for hearing evaluation; Teacher of the Deaf/Hard of Hearing (TDHH) for educational assessment.

What the Diagnostician Brings Cognitive data adapted for hearing status (nonverbal measures preferred if appropriate — KABC-II NVI, visual-spatial tasks); academic achievement documentation. Screen documentation is critical — hearing screening results must be on record. HI is an exclusionary factor for SLD — confirm and document hearing has been screened prior to SLD identification.

🦽

Orthopedic Impairment (OI)

TAC §89.1040(c)(8)

▼

Primary evaluator: Multidisciplinary team including OT/PT and physician. Medical documentation of the orthopedic condition required.

What the Diagnostician Brings Academic achievement data with appropriate accommodations for motor limitations (oral responses, scribe, extended time); cognitive assessment adapted as needed. Document how the orthopedic condition specifically impacts educational access and output — particularly writing and graphomotor tasks.

🧠

Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI)

TAC §89.1040(c)(12)

▼

Primary evaluator: LSSP / neuropsychologist, in coordination with medical documentation. Requires documented acquired brain injury from external physical force.

What the Diagnostician Brings Comprehensive cognitive and academic assessment to document post-injury functioning; comparison to any pre-injury data if available. Processing speed, working memory, and executive functioning are commonly affected areas after TBI. Document the profile carefully — TBI profiles are often uneven and may improve over time.

🌀

Multiple Disabilities (MD)

TAC §89.1040(c)(6)

▼

Primary evaluator: Full multidisciplinary team — multiple specialists typically involved depending on the combination of disabilities.

What the Diagnostician Brings Cognitive and academic data adapted for the student's multiple needs; adaptive behavior (ABAS-3). Multiple Disabilities requires that the combination of impairments causes such severe educational needs that the student cannot be accommodated in programs for a single disability. The diagnostician contributes the intellectual functioning and academic achievement components of that documentation.