Understanding FERPA: What is “Legitimate Educational Interest”?

Last updated 3 months ago. Our resources are updated regularly but please keep in mind that links, programs, policies, and contact information do change.

Student Privacy and Necessary Access

The Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) stands as a critical federal law safeguarding the confidentiality of student education records in the United States. A central principle of FERPA is that educational institutions must generally obtain written consent from parents or eligible students before disclosing personally identifiable information (PII) contained within these records.

However, the realities of operating a school mean that certain individuals within the institution have access to student information to perform their duties effectively. Recognizing this, FERPA includes specific, limited exceptions to the general consent rule.

This article examines one of the most significant and commonly used exceptions: the provision allowing access for “school officials” who possess a “Legitimate Educational Interest” (LEI) in the records.

Understanding this exception is crucial for parents, students, educators, and administrators alike. It clarifies when and why certain school personnel can view student records without specific prior consent. The LEI exception represents a carefully constructed balance within FERPA, acknowledging the fundamental right to privacy while permitting the necessary internal flow of information required for the educational process to function.

FERPA Overview

The Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act, commonly known as FERPA or sometimes the Buckley Amendment, is a federal law enacted by the U.S. Congress in 1974. Its fundamental purpose is twofold: first, it grants parents (and students who have reached the age of 18 or attend a postsecondary institution) the right to access the student’s education records maintained by the school. Second, it protects the privacy of these records by generally prohibiting disclosure of personally identifiable information from them to third parties without obtaining prior written consent.

FERPA’s requirements apply broadly to educational agencies and institutions that receive funding under any program administered by the U.S. Department of Education. This funding criterion means that FERPA covers almost all public K-12 schools, school districts, and public colleges and universities. It also applies to many private educational institutions that receive federal funds.

The potential consequence for schools having a policy or practice of improperly disclosing student records or failing to provide access rights is severe: the loss of all federal funding. This powerful enforcement mechanism underscores the importance federal law places on protecting student privacy and incentivizes strict compliance by covered institutions.

Key Rights Under FERPA

FERPA grants specific rights to parents and eligible students:

• The Right to Inspect and Review: Parents or eligible students have the right to inspect and review the student’s education records maintained by the school. Schools must provide access within a reasonable timeframe, not exceeding 45 days from receiving the request.
• The Right to Seek Amendment: If a parent or eligible student believes information in the education records is inaccurate, misleading, or violates the student’s privacy rights, they have the right to request that the school amend the records. This right is generally intended for correcting factual errors, not for challenging substantive decisions like grades based on performance or the outcomes of disciplinary proceedings. If the school denies the amendment request, it must inform the parent or eligible student of their right to a hearing.
• The Right to Consent to Disclosures: Generally, schools must obtain written consent from the parent or eligible student before disclosing personally identifiable information (PII) from the student’s education records. However, FERPA outlines several exceptions where disclosure is permitted without consent, including the “Legitimate Educational Interest” exception discussed in this article.

Rights Transfer

A critical aspect of FERPA is the transfer of these rights. The rights belong to the parents of a student until that student reaches 18 years of age OR enrolls in a postsecondary institution (like a college or university) at any age. Once either of these conditions is met, the rights automatically transfer from the parents directly to the student. The student is then referred to as an “eligible student” under FERPA.

This transfer is significant; it means that postsecondary institutions interact primarily with the student regarding access, amendment, and consent for disclosure of their records, fundamentally shifting the dynamic from the K-12 environment where parents hold these rights. This shift occurs regardless of the student’s financial dependency status for most FERPA purposes.

Education Records and PII

FERPA’s protections center on “education records.” The law defines this term broadly to encompass records that meet two conditions: they must be (1) directly related to a student, and (2) maintained by an educational agency or institution, or by a party acting on behalf of the agency or institution (such as a third-party contractor providing specific services).

This broad definition signifies an intent to provide comprehensive coverage for information schools keep about students. The format in which the information is stored does not matter; education records can include handwritten notes, printed documents, computer files, emails, photographs, videos, audio recordings, microfilm, and other materials.

Common Examples of Education Records

• Grades and transcripts
• Class lists and student course schedules
• Disciplinary records
• Student financial aid records
• Health and immunization records maintained by the school nurse or health office

Personally Identifiable Information (PII)

Within these education records, FERPA specifically protects “Personally Identifiable Information” or PII. PII refers to any information that could be used to identify a specific student. This obviously includes direct identifiers such as the student’s name, address, parent’s or other family members’ names, Social Security number, or student ID number.

However, the definition extends further to include indirect identifiers like the student’s date of birth, place of birth, or mother’s maiden name. It also covers other information that, either alone or when combined with other data, is linked or linkable to a specific student and would allow a reasonable person within the school community, who doesn’t have personal knowledge of the circumstances, to identify the student with reasonable certainty. This includes biometric records, such as fingerprints, voiceprints, retinal scans, or facial characteristics.

What’s Not Considered an Education Record

It is equally important to understand what is not considered an education record under FERPA, as these items fall outside its primary privacy protections:

• Sole Possession Records: Records kept in the sole possession of the individual who made them (e.g., a teacher’s private memory joggers), provided they are used only as a personal memory aid and are not accessible or revealed to anyone else except a temporary substitute.
• Law Enforcement Unit Records: Records created and maintained by a school’s designated law enforcement unit for a law enforcement purpose. These records are treated differently and may be shared according to different rules.
• Employment Records: Records related to individuals employed by the school that are made in the normal course of business, relate exclusively to their capacity as an employee, and are not available for other purposes. However, records related to students employed because of their status as students (e.g., work-study) are generally considered education records.
• Post-Attendance Records: Records created or received by the school after an individual is no longer a student there and that are not directly related to their previous attendance.
• Peer Grades (Pre-Collection): Grades on papers or exams graded by fellow students before they are collected and recorded by the teacher.
• Personal Observation: Information derived solely from a school official’s personal knowledge or observation of a student, provided that knowledge was not obtained from accessing an education record. This distinction is subtle but significant; an official witnessing student behavior can generally discuss that observation without FERPA limitations. However, once that observation is documented in a student’s file (e.g., a disciplinary report), that document becomes an education record subject to FERPA.

Regarding health records, the situation requires careful attention. While records made or maintained by a physician, psychologist, or other recognized professional acting in their professional capacity and used only for treatment might be excluded under specific conditions (often referred to as “treatment records” primarily in postsecondary settings), health records maintained by the K-12 school itself, such as those held by the school nurse or related to school health services, are considered education records under FERPA. This means that internal access to these sensitive records by school officials must meet the “Legitimate Educational Interest” standard.

The “Legitimate Educational Interest” Exception

As established, FERPA’s default position requires schools to obtain written consent from parents or eligible students before disclosing PII from education records. However, the law acknowledges that strict adherence to this rule in all circumstances would hinder the basic functioning of educational institutions. Consequently, FERPA includes several specific exceptions where disclosure without prior consent is permissible.

One of the most fundamental and frequently utilized exceptions is codified in the federal regulations at 34 CFR § 99.31(a)(1). This provision allows an educational agency or institution to disclose PII from a student’s education records, without consent, to other “school officials” within the agency or institution whom the school has determined to have “legitimate educational interests” in the information. This exception is primarily designed to facilitate the necessary internal operations of the school.

Purpose of the LEI Exception

The underlying purpose of the LEI exception is practical and essential for education. It enables teachers, counselors, administrators, advisors, and other staff members who need specific student information to perform their assigned job duties effectively.

Without this exception, routine tasks like a teacher reviewing past grades to understand a student’s needs, an advisor checking degree progress, or a principal accessing records for a disciplinary matter would require obtaining specific written consent each time, potentially paralyzing school operations. The LEI exception, therefore, allows for the appropriate internal flow of information necessary to educate and support students, manage the institution, and ensure safety. It focuses on access within the institution (or by its designated agents acting as officials), distinguishing it from disclosures to external entities which are governed by different FERPA rules or require consent.

Critically, FERPA requires that each educational agency or institution clearly define its own criteria for implementing this exception. Specifically, the school must specify in its annual notification of FERPA rights to parents and eligible students who it considers to be a “school official” and what it considers to constitute a “legitimate educational interest”. This requirement, found in 34 CFR § 99.7(a)(3)(iii), means that while the general principle is set by federal law, the precise application can vary somewhat between institutions based on their structure and needs.

However, this local definition is not arbitrary. The school’s criteria must align with the underlying purpose of the exception – enabling officials to access records necessary to fulfill their professional responsibilities related to the student’s education or welfare. The U.S. Department of Education retains oversight and could determine that a school’s definition or application of LEI is improperly broad.

Who Can Access Records: “School Officials”

FERPA grants educational institutions the authority to determine which individuals qualify as “school officials” for the purposes of accessing student records under the legitimate educational interest exception. As mandated, this definition must be outlined in the school’s annual FERPA notification.

Typically, the definition of “school official” includes individuals directly employed by the educational agency or institution in various capacities. Common examples found in school policies often include:

• Instructional Staff: Teachers, professors, teaching assistants
• Administrators: Principals, superintendents, deans, department chairs, registrars, admissions officers
• Student Support Staff: Counselors, academic advisors, psychologists, social workers employed by the school
• Other Professional and Support Staff: Individuals in administrative, supervisory, research, health services, or other support roles whose duties require access
• Governing Body Members: Members of the school board or board of trustees acting in their official capacity
• Students on Official Committees: Students serving on official school committees, such as disciplinary or grievance committees, when access is necessary for their role
• School Law Enforcement Unit Personnel: If designated by the school in its policy, officers or security personnel employed by the school can be considered school officials. This designation allows them access to education records under LEI when needed for school safety or related duties, although their own law enforcement records created for law enforcement purposes remain distinct and are generally not considered education records.

External Parties as “School Officials”

Importantly, FERPA recognizes that schools often utilize external parties to perform essential functions. Therefore, the definition of “school official” can be extended beyond direct employees to include contractors, consultants, volunteers, and other outside parties under specific conditions outlined in the regulations at 34 CFR § 99.31(a)(1)(i)(B). Examples of such parties might include:

• Companies providing educational software or online learning platforms
• Attorneys representing the school
• Auditors conducting financial or compliance reviews
• Collection agencies acting on behalf of the institution
• Volunteers assisting in classrooms or school activities under direct supervision
• Medical staff contracted to provide health services at the school

For an external party to be designated as a “school official” and granted access to education records under LEI, FERPA imposes strict requirements. The outside party must:

1. Perform an institutional service or function for which the school would otherwise use its own employees
2. Be under the direct control of the school with respect to the use and maintenance of the education records. This “direct control” element is crucial; it signifies that the school must retain authority over how the third party handles the student data, ensuring the vendor acts essentially as an extension of the school for that specific data-handling purpose.
3. Be subject to FERPA’s requirements governing the use and redisclosure of PII from education records. This means the party can only use the information for the specific purpose for which the disclosure was made and is generally prohibited from redisclosing the information to any other party without consent.

Schools typically ensure these conditions are met through carefully worded contracts or written agreements that explicitly outline the vendor’s responsibilities regarding student data privacy and security. This contractual framework is essential for maintaining accountability when outsourcing functions involving student records.

Criteria for “Legitimate Educational Interest”

Being identified as a “school official” under an institution’s policy is only the first step; it does not automatically grant that individual the right to access any and all student education records. Access under the LEI exception is strictly conditional and purpose-driven. The official must have a “legitimate educational interest” in the specific records they seek to access.

While FERPA requires schools to define this term in their annual notification, guidance from the U.S. Department of Education and common institutional policies indicate that a legitimate educational interest generally exists if the school official needs to review an education record in order to fulfill their professional responsibility for the school. This establishes a “need-to-know” standard directly linked to the official’s job duties.

Professional Responsibilities Establishing LEI

The types of professional responsibilities that typically establish a legitimate educational interest often include tasks such as:

• Performing a task outlined in the official’s job description or employment contract
• Carrying out activities directly related to a student’s academic development, such as teaching, advising, grading, or evaluating academic progress
• Addressing matters related to student discipline according to school policies
• Providing a service or benefit that supports the student’s education or well-being, such as counseling, health services, financial aid processing, or job placement assistance
• Participating in activities related to maintaining the safety and security of the school community, such as serving on a threat assessment team or investigating potential risks
• Supporting the administrative functions of the school, such as enrollment management or institutional research, provided the access is necessary for those functions

The core principle is that the official’s need to access the information must be directly connected to their assigned duties within the context of the school’s educational mission. Access based on personal curiosity, private interest, or reasons unrelated to official school business is explicitly prohibited under FERPA. Furthermore, the information accessed should be relevant and necessary for the specific task the official is performing; the LEI exception does not authorize unrestricted browsing of student records. Access is typically role-based and contextual – what one official needs to know for their job differs significantly from what another official might need.

Reasonable Methods Requirement

To ensure compliance with this principle, FERPA requires educational institutions to use “reasonable methods” to make sure that school officials access only those education records in which they have legitimate educational interests. This mandate, found in 34 CFR § 99.31(a)(1)(ii), implies a proactive responsibility for schools to manage internal access. These “reasonable methods” can take various forms, including:

• Technological Controls: Implementing role-based access permissions in student information systems, ensuring users can only view data relevant to their specific job functions
• Administrative Policies: Establishing clear policies that define LEI, outline procedures for accessing records, and specify consequences for unauthorized access
• Training: Providing regular training to all staff members who handle student information, ensuring they understand their responsibilities under FERPA, the school’s specific policies, and the importance of the LEI standard

Effective implementation requires not just defining LEI, but actively managing and enforcing those definitions through systems and training to prevent misuse.

Examples of Appropriate and Inappropriate Access

The concept of “Legitimate Educational Interest” can seem abstract. Examining specific scenarios helps clarify the practical difference between accessing student records appropriately under this FERPA exception and accessing them inappropriately. Whether access is permissible often depends heavily on the context: the official’s specific role and responsibilities, the information being sought, and the reason for accessing it.

Appropriate Access Examples

• A high school English teacher reviews the previous semester’s grades and attendance records for students newly enrolled in their class to better understand their academic background and potential support needs. This relates directly to the task of instruction and tailoring teaching methods.
• A university academic advisor accesses a student’s transcript and degree audit report during a scheduled advising appointment to help the student select courses required for graduation. This is essential for fulfilling the advisor’s core responsibility of guiding the student’s education.
• A middle school principal reviews the disciplinary file of a student referred to the office for violating the school’s code of conduct to understand past behavior patterns and determine appropriate consequences consistent with school policy. This falls under the task related to student discipline.
• A college financial aid officer accesses a student’s enrollment verification and application materials to determine eligibility for federal student aid and institutional scholarships. This is necessary for administering student aid programs, a permitted purpose.
• A school psychologist, employed by the district, reviews a student’s academic and attendance records as part of an evaluation process requested by the student’s parents or teachers to determine eligibility for special education services. This involves providing a professional service related to the student’s education.
• A designated member of a university’s threat assessment team accesses relevant enrollment and behavioral records of a student identified as potentially posing a risk to themselves or others, following established protocols. This aligns with maintaining campus safety, a recognized institutional function.
• A technician employed by a third-party vendor contracted to manage the school’s student information system accesses specific student data fields necessary to troubleshoot a technical problem preventing the student from registering for classes. This constitutes performing an institutional function under contract, subject to FERPA controls.

Inappropriate Access Examples

• A university professor looks up the grades of a student they are not teaching or advising, simply because the student is the child of a colleague or neighbor. This constitutes access based on curiosity, not professional need.
• A school secretary accesses the disciplinary records of students involved in a recent school protest because they personally disagree with the students’ views. Access must be related to official duties, not personal opinions or interests.
• A cafeteria worker uses the student database to find a student’s phone number to ask them out socially. This is entirely unrelated to any legitimate educational purpose or job responsibility.
• A volunteer parent helping in the library accesses student borrowing records beyond what is needed for their assigned task of re-shelving books. Access must be limited to the information necessary for the specific assigned function.
• A faculty member not involved in athletics accesses the academic records of student-athletes unless their defined role (e.g., specific advisor for athletes) and the school’s policy explicitly grants them LEI for that purpose. Being a school official does not grant universal access; it must be tied to specific responsibilities.

These examples illustrate that the LEI exception, while necessary for school operations, requires careful management. The potential for misuse exists if policies are unclear, training is inadequate, or oversight is lacking. Strong internal controls are essential to ensure access aligns with FERPA’s intent.

Legitimate Educational Interest (LEI) Access Examples

School Responsibilities: Policies, Notification, and Record-Keeping

Educational institutions utilizing the “Legitimate Educational Interest” exception under FERPA are not merely permitted to do so; they have specific obligations they must fulfill to ensure compliance with the law and maintain transparency with their communities. These responsibilities are crucial for the proper administration of the LEI provision.

Develop Written Policies

A cornerstone of compliance is the requirement for schools to establish and maintain clear, written policies regarding LEI. This policy must explicitly define two key elements:

1. Who the institution considers to be a “school official.”
2. What the institution considers to constitute a “legitimate educational interest.”

Having these criteria clearly documented is fundamental, as FERPA delegates this definitional authority to the institution itself, within the bounds of the law’s intent. These internal policies become the operational guide for applying the LEI exception correctly.

Provide Annual Notification

Transparency is mandated through FERPA’s annual notification requirement. Schools must inform parents of students currently in attendance, or eligible students currently in attendance, of their rights under FERPA each year.

Critically, this annual notice must include the school’s specific criteria for determining who constitutes a school official and what constitutes a legitimate educational interest (34 CFR § 99.7(a)(3)(iii)). This ensures that parents and students are aware of the school’s specific policies regarding internal access to education records without specific consent, serving as the primary mechanism for transparency on this issue. Reviewing this annual notice is essential for understanding a particular school’s practices.

Implement Reasonable Access Controls

As previously noted, schools must employ “reasonable methods” to ensure that officials access only the PII from education records in which they have a legitimate educational interest (34 CFR § 99.31(a)(1)(ii)). This requires proactive management of access. Methods can include technological solutions like role-based permissions in databases or physical controls for paper records. Equally important are effective administrative policies and comprehensive training for all staff members who may handle student records, emphasizing their FERPA obligations and the limits of LEI.

Maintain Records of Disclosure (with an Exception for LEI)

FERPA generally requires schools to maintain a record of each request for access to and each disclosure of PII from a student’s education records (34 CFR § 99.32). This record must typically indicate the party making the request, the date access was granted, and the legitimate interest the party had in requesting or obtaining the information. This log applies to most disclosures made without consent to external parties under other FERPA exceptions (e.g., audits, transfers, subpoenas).

However, there is a significant nuance regarding internal access: FERPA regulations explicitly state that schools are not required to record disclosures made to school officials who have legitimate educational interests under § 99.31(a)(1) (34 CFR § 99.32(d)(1)). Schools are also not required to log disclosures of directory information or disclosures made with prior consent.

This means that while disclosures to outside entities are generally tracked, the routine, day-to-day access by a teacher, advisor, or administrator under the LEI exception might not have a formal audit trail mandated by FERPA. Schools may choose to implement internal logging systems for security or auditing purposes, but it is not a federal requirement for LEI access. This highlights a difference in oversight mechanisms between internal LEI access (reliant on policies, training, access controls) and external disclosures (reliant on logging).

Key Resources from the U.S. Department of Education

For individuals seeking more comprehensive information, official interpretations, or answers to specific questions about FERPA, including the “Legitimate Educational Interest” exception, the primary authoritative source is the U.S. Department of Education’s Student Privacy Policy Office (SPPO). SPPO administers and enforces FERPA and provides extensive technical assistance and guidance. Its role as the central authority means its publications and website are the most reliable resources for understanding current FERPA requirements and interpretations.

Key official resources available through SPPO include:

• Student Privacy Policy Office (SPPO) Website: The main online portal for all official FERPA information, guidance documents, training materials, and updates.
• FERPA Regulations (34 CFR Part 99): The complete text of the federal regulations implementing FERPA. This is the controlling legal document.
• Guidance Documents: SPPO publishes various guides tailored to different audiences to explain FERPA in practical terms. Notable guides include:
  • A Parent Guide to FERPA: Provides general information on parents’ rights.
  • An Eligible Student Guide to FERPA: Explains the rights that transfer to students at age 18 or upon entering postsecondary education.
  • Other topic-specific guidance (e.g., on student health records, data sharing, COVID-19 related issues) can be found on the SPPO guidance page.
• Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs): SPPO maintains a list of frequently asked questions covering various aspects of FERPA, including specific scenarios related to school officials and legitimate educational interests.
• Online Training Modules: Interactive, self-paced training courses designed for different stakeholders (e.g., K-12 officials, postsecondary officials) covering FERPA basics and specific topics like data sharing.
• Filing a Complaint: Information and forms for parents or eligible students who believe their rights under FERPA have been violated by an educational institution. Complaints are filed directly with SPPO.

It is advisable for schools, parents, and students to consult these official resources regularly. Guidance on FERPA application can evolve as new educational technologies emerge and novel situations arise. Staying informed through the SPPO website ensures understanding aligns with the latest interpretations and best practices for protecting student privacy while facilitating necessary educational functions.

Our articles make government information more accessible. Please consult a qualified professional for financial, legal, or health advice specific to your circumstances.