Part 1: Risk Management in Dual Enrollment Programs

Published on: June 15, 2026

A Joint NABITA and ATIXA Tip of the Week by Mandy Hambleton, M.S., and Alisha Carter Harris, M.S.

For higher education institutions looking to increase enrollment and K-12 schools aiming to offer advanced courses, dual enrollment (often also called Early College) offers an appealing option. However, creating or expanding these programs involves legal and procedural challenges.

Dual enrollment places two systems with different legal obligations around the same student and sometimes the same employees. This friction is particularly apparent in matters involving behavioral threat assessment and management (BTAM), Behavioral Intervention Teams (BITs), and civil rights compliance (including Title IX and Title VI).

When an incident or complaint occurs, institutions must determine who responds, which policies apply, and what information can be shared. Without prior alignment, the result can be delayed action, duplicated efforts, or no response at all, all of which increase liability, compliance risk, and gaps in support.

In this two-part series, NABITA and ATIXA offer joint guidance on what dual enrollment programs entail, key questions to consider, and which policies govern incident response and complaint resolution.

What is Dual Enrollment and How is it Structured?

At its core, dual enrollment allows high school students to take college courses. Although the concept is straightforward, implementation is not.

These programs serve a wide range of students and can take many different forms. Courses may be taught by college faculty or by high school teachers using college-approved curriculum and may be offered in person or online.

Some students earn college credits in their K-12 environment and never set foot on a college campus, while others take college classes part-time on a campus. More immersive models, such as collegiate high schools, place students on a college campus full-time and often allow them to graduate with both a high school diploma and an associate degree. These differences in instruction, location, and structure can help to determine who is responsible when issues arise.

Ask Yourself These Questions

1. Does your school or institution currently serve dual enrollment students or employ individuals responsible for managing these programs?
2. Is there a formal agreement, such as a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU), that clearly defines roles and responsibilities between the K-12 district and higher education institution?
3. Have you established protocols for sharing information when concerns arise, including who communicates and what can be shared?
4. Are faculty and staff members trained on their obligations when working with minors, including mandated reporting requirements?

Establish Policies Before an Incident Occurs

BIT models from higher education can’t be directly applied to K-12 environments, just as K-12 BTAM approaches don’t work in higher education. You can’t simply “find and replace” words in a policy to adapt it to a different educational setting.

Compliance and reporting obligations, particularly those related to Title IX, Title VI, ADA/Section 504, and Clery Act, must be regularly reviewed and customized for your specific dual enrollment program.

Focus on Where K-12 and Higher Education Intersect

The following are the core areas where responsibilities most often overlap:

Jurisdiction:

• When an incident occurs, responsibility for responding could fall on the high school, the college, or both.
• What process will determine who leads the response, and when a shared response is necessary?

Information-sharing:

• Clear protocols are essential for coordinating support.
• Who are the points of contact? What can be shared, how will it be shared, and how will privacy be protected?

Parent/guardian rights:

• Parents/guardians often retain Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) rights for K-12 students, while college students typically hold their own. Dual enrollment students may fall into both categories.
• How will schools and institutions determine when parent access applies and when student consent for parental involvement is required?

Policy alignment:

• Student conduct and civil rights processes differ across systems, particularly in due process requirements. For example, K-12 Title IX processes may not require live hearings, whereas college processes commonly do, and in some contexts, they are required.
• How will schools navigate these differences when responding to the same incident?

Mandatory and mandated reporting:

• Reporting obligations differ and are often misunderstood. Title IX reporting requirements are distinct from mandated child abuse reporting laws.
• How will college employees be trained to recognize and respond to both? When required to report, how will information be shared with K-12 partners?

Across all areas, partnership and alignment can prevent a breakdown. Clear roles, reporting expectations, and communication protocols allow institutions to act quickly, collaborate as necessary, respond consistently, and support students effectively.

In the second part of this Tip of the Week series, we explore the complexities inherent in dual enrollment and how a thoughtful structure can reduce confusion, liability, and risk.

Contact inquiry@tngconsulting.com to learn more about available resources, trainings, and support.