As policy debates concerning LGBTQ+ students and staff continue across the American education system, there is not a clear description of the prevalence of local policy protections, even in states with legislative mandates, nor a strong understanding of how to expand reform initiatives. After conducting a document analysis of policies with a statewide, representative sample of districts, this study uses Illinois as a case study to describe several educational policy levers to scale gender and sexual diversity (GSD) reforms across federal, state, intermediary, and local institutions. The results indicate all districts complied with top-down legislative mandates, but few policies referenced gender or sexual diversity if not state-mandated. A minority of districts enacted policies through administrative guidance (27%), often using language from a state intermediary organization. Results from the regression analysis suggest local factors, such as district size, per pupil spending, and rurality, contribute to adopting guidance, but not policy protections. This study indicates both top-down and bottom-up pathways matter for expanding GSD-related reforms.
Do governments delay the implementation of parliamentary requests? Examining time variation in implementing legislative requests in Switzerland
