AdvocateDadCO#AdvocateDad · Western Colorado

Policy & Action · Colorado

Accessible materials are a right—not a repository.

Families should not have to become experts in NIMAS, NIMAC, Bookshare, or procurement rules just to get a student the materials needed to learn. This brief separates the student’s IDEA right to timely accessible instructional materials from the systems used to produce them.

First policy briefReviewed September 12, 2026Primary sources linked below

The bottom line

NIMAS eligibility is not the limit of a district’s responsibility.

IDEA requires states and school districts to make sure children with disabilities who need instructional materials in accessible formats receive them in a timely manner. Federal regulations specifically preserve that responsibility for students who do not fit the NIMAS/NIMAC eligibility pathway and for materials that cannot be produced from NIMAS files. [34 CFR §300.210(b)(3)]

Colorado’s ECEA rules define “in a timely manner” as taking all reasonable steps to provide accessible instructional materials at the same time materials are provided to nondisabled peers. IDEA likewise requires the SEA to ensure public agencies take all reasonable steps to provide needed accessible materials at the same time other children receive instructional materials. [34 CFR §300.172(b)(4)]

Colorado compared with IDEA

Where the rules align—and where the guidance needs work.

Aligned

Same-time access

Colorado defines timely access around providing materials at the same time they are provided to nondisabled peers. That closely tracks IDEA’s requirement that public agencies take all reasonable steps to provide accessible materials when other children receive instructional materials. [§300.172(b)(4)]

Aligned

NIMAS and NIMAC

Colorado adopts NIMAS and coordinates with NIMAC. CDE currently identifies APH, Bookshare, and the Colorado Instructional Materials Center as authorized users that can obtain NIMAS source files for Colorado.

Needs clarity

Students outside NIMAS eligibility

CDE’s public page understandably focuses on NIMAS/NIMAC eligibility. Federal law is broader: a district’s responsibility continues when a student needs an accessible format but is not eligible for NIMAS-sourced materials. [§300.210(b)(3)]

Needs clarity

Materials outside NIMAS

CDE notes that some materials, including trade books such as novels, are exempt from NIMAS requirements. That does not mean a needed novel or other instructional material is exempt from the broader IDEA duty to provide accessible instructional materials in a timely manner. [§300.210(b)(3)]

Policy alert

Colorado’s current ECEA text appears to contain a federal cross-reference error.

What the text says

Colorado ECEA Rule 5.01(21)(c)(ii) says the term “blind persons or other persons with print disabilities” has the meaning given in 34 CFR §300.172(e)(1)(ii).

What the federal regulation says

In the federal regulation, that definition appears in §300.172(e)(1)(i). Subsection (ii) defines the National Instructional Materials Access Center (NIMAC).

Assessment: this appears to be a drafting or cross-reference error in the Colorado rule. The intent is apparent, and the federal obligation remains controlling, but the state text should be corrected so families, districts, and professionals are not directed to the wrong subsection.

At the IEP table

Ask for the access process—not just the name of a service.

An IEP team should be able to explain the required format, the technology needed to use it, who is responsible for obtaining or producing it, and how the district will prevent delays. “Digital materials” is not enough if the file is inaccessible to the student’s screen reader, magnification, braille display, or other required assistive technology.

  1. What instructional materials will be used next semester or next year, and which need an accessible version?
  2. What format is usable for this student and this task—braille, large print, accessible digital text, audio, tactile graphics, or another format?
  3. Who owns the responsibility for obtaining, converting, checking, and delivering each material?
  4. How far in advance must teachers provide materials so accessibility work does not delay instruction?
  5. What happens with teacher-created worksheets, slides, tests, graphics, or last-minute materials?
  6. How will the district verify compatibility with the student’s assistive technology before the material is needed?
  7. What is the backup plan when NIMAC, Bookshare, APH, CIMC, or the publisher does not have the material?

Sample IEP language

Based on the student’s identified disability-related needs, the student will receive instructional materials required for participation in the curriculum in the accessible format identified by the IEP team as appropriate for the specific material and instructional task. Materials will be provided in a student-ready, usable format at the same time the corresponding materials are provided to nondisabled peers. When a needed accessible version is not available through NIMAC or another accessible-media repository, the district will use another lawful source or production method to provide the format the student requires in a timely manner. The district will verify compatibility with the student’s required assistive technology before instructional use.

What Colorado should do

Four practical fixes would make the policy clearer for everyone.

  1. Correct the ECEA cross-reference in Rule 5.01(21)(c)(ii) from §300.172(e)(1)(ii) to §300.172(e)(1)(i).
  2. State plainly that NIMAS eligibility is not the full IDEA entitlement. Students who need accessible materials may still have a district right to timely access even when NIMAS/NIMAC is unavailable or inapplicable.
  3. Pair every NIMAS exemption explanation with the broader IDEA duty. A trade book can be outside NIMAS and still need to be provided in an accessible format for a particular student.
  4. Publish an implementation checklist for districts covering advance planning, teacher-created materials, accessible digital content, assistive-technology compatibility, responsibility, and contingency planning.

Primary sources

Read the governing language yourself.

Policy analysis is strongest when it distinguishes the governing rule from implementation guidance and from a recommended policy improvement. This page does that deliberately.

This parent-facing briefing provides educational and policy information, not individualized legal advice. IDEA decisions are student-specific; families may wish to consult appropriate legal or advocacy resources for individual disputes.