34 C.F.R. § 300.115
Continuum of alternative placements
(a) Each public agency must ensure that a continuum of alternative placements is available to meet the needs of children with disabilities for special education and related services.
(b) The continuum required in paragraph (a) of this section must—
(1) Include the alternative placements listed in the definition of special education under § 300.39 (instruction in regular classes, special classes, special schools, home instruction, and instruction in hospitals and institutions); and
(2) Make provision for supplementary services (such as resource room or itinerant instruction) to be provided in conjunction with regular class placement.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 51
cases (11 in the last 5 years), 2007–2026 · leading case: T.M. ex rel. A.M. v. Cornwall Cent. Sch. Dist., 752 F.3d 145 (2d Cir. 2014).
T.M. ex rel. A.M. v. Cornwall Cent. Sch. Dist., 752 F.3d 145 (2d Cir. 2014). “” 34 C.F.R. § 300.115 (a), (b)(1); see also H.”
Brown v. Dist. of Columbia, 179 F. Supp. 3d 15 (D.D.C. 2016). “Indeed, the Department of Education’s implementing regulations specifically lists the types of placements included in this continuum, see 34 C.F.R. § 300.115 , and identifies a discussion of the alternative placements as an "LRE requirement[].”
M. S. v. L. A. Unified Sch. Dist., 913 F.3d 1119 (9th Cir. 2019). “'s educational] needs,' 34 C.F.R. § 300.115 (a) -and to consider whether a residential placement was '[ ] necessary for educational purposes' and not merely 'necessary quite apart from the learning process.”
R.L. v. Miami-Dade Cnty. Sch. Bd., 757 F.3d 1173 (11th Cir. 2014). “§ 1401 (29); see also 34 C.F.R. § 300.115 (listing home instruction as part of the continuum of alternative placements states must make available to students to comply with the IDEA).”
S.B. v. Cal. Dep't of Educ., 327 F. Supp. 3d 1218 (E.D. Cal. 2018). “required an educational placement in an appropriate residential treatment center within the state of California in order to receive a FAPE.”
Lessard v. Wilton-Lyndeborough Coop. Sch. Dist., 592 F.3d 267 (1st Cir. 2010). “The Lessards’ second basic objection to the proposed 2005-06 IEP is that it failed to place Stephanie in the least restrictive environment in which she could receive educational benefits, as is required.”
I.L. ex rel. Taylor v. Knox Cnty. Bd. of Educ., 257 F. Supp. 3d 946 (E.D. Tenn. 2017). “34 C.F.R. § 300.115 . It moves from the least-restrictive environment — a regular class with no supports — to the most restrictive — instruction in a hospital or institution.”
J.A. v. Smith Cnty. Sch. Dist., 364 F. Supp. 3d 803 (M.D. Tenn. 2019). “" 34 C.F.R. § 300.115 (a), (b)(2). "Supplementary aids and services means aids, services, and other supports that are provided in regular education classes , other education-related settings, and in extracurricular and nonacademic settings, to enable children with disabilities…”
Ellenberg Ex Rel. S.E. v. New Mexico Military Inst., 478 F.3d 1262 (10th Cir. 2007). “” 34 C.F.R. § 300.115 (a). Placement decisions must be based on the child’s IEP, and made by “a group of persons, including the parents, and other persons knowledgeable about the child, the meaning of the evaluation data, and the placement options.”
B.H. v. Manhattan Beach Unified Sch. Dist., 247 Cal. Rptr. 3d 501 (Cal. Ct. App. 5th 2019). “§ 1400 (d)(1)(A) ; 34 C.F.R. § 300.115 (a).) If the intensive level of services provided by a residential treatment center or licensed children's institution is necessary for a student's FAPE, the student's placement in such a facility is an appropriate *571 part of the IEP.”
James v. Bd. of Educ. of Aptakisic-Tripp Cmty. Consol. Sch. Dist. No. 102, 642 F. Supp. 2d 804 (N.D. Ill. 2009). “§ 1412 (a)(5), 34 C.F.R. § 300.115 ; (4) whether the school district failed to address all of Sarah’s educational needs, which consists of language arts, math, executive functioning, and social/emotional needs, in addition to reading, pursuant to 20 U.”
ND Ex Rel. Guard. Ad Litem v. Hi Dept. of Educ., 600 F.3d 1104 (9th Cir. 2010). “The agency's implementation of the statute provides further insights and supports the idea that placement relates to the classroom setting.”
— 34 C.F.R. § 300.115(a) — 1 case
Lausd v. A. O. (9th Cir. 2024).
— 34 C.F.R. § 300.115(b)(1) — 1 case
Jennifer D. Ex Rel. Travis D. v. New York City Dep't of Educ., 550 F. Supp. 2d 420 (S.D.N.Y. 2008).
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.