34 C.F.R. § 300.116

Placements

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

In determining the educational placement of a child with a disability, including a preschool child with a disability, each public agency must ensure that—

(a) The placement decision—

(1) Is 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; and

(2) Is made in conformity with the LRE provisions of this subpart, including §§ 300.114 through 300.118;

(b) The child's placement—

(1) Is determined at least annually;

(2) Is based on the child's IEP; and

(3) Is as close as possible to the child's home;

(c) Unless the IEP of a child with a disability requires some other arrangement, the child is educated in the school that he or she would attend if nondisabled;

(d) In selecting the LRE, consideration is given to any potential harmful effect on the child or on the quality of services that he or she needs; and

(e) A child with a disability is not removed from education in age-appropriate regular classrooms solely because of needed modifications in the general education curriculum.

(Approved by the Office of Management and Budget under control number 1820-0030) (Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1412(a)(5))

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 93 cases (33 in the last 5 years), 2007–2026 · leading case: R.L. v. Miami-Dade County School Board

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

R.L. v. Miami-Dade County School Board (2014) ca11 · cites it 6× “Among the decisions that must be made by the IEP team is the educational placement — that is, the setting where the student will be educated — which must be “based on the child’s IEP.”

N.W. v. District of Columbia (2017) dcd · cites it 2× “327 ; see also 34 C.F.R. § 300.116 (a) (requiring that the placement decision be 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”).”

Hinson Ex Rel. N.H. v. Merritt Educational Center (2008) dcd · cites it 3× “” 34 C.F.R. § 300.116 . In determining the appropriate placement for a child, preference given to the least restrictive environment and the appropriate schools nearest the child’s home.”

N.E. Ex Rel. C.E. v. Seattle School District (2016) ca9 · cites it 2× “(ii) The IDEA separately defines “Individualized Education Program.”

T.M. ex rel. A.M. v. Cornwall Central School District (2014) ca2 “This regulation now appears, as amended, at 34 C.F.R. § 300.116 . The explanatory note cited here was removed in 1999 “in light of the general decision to remove all notes from the[] final regulations.”

Middleton v. Dist. of Columbia (2018) cadc “§ 1414 ; see also 34 C.F.R. §§ 300.116 (a), 300.327, 300.501(b), 300.”

Hjortness Ex Rel. Hjortness v. Neenah Joint School District (2007) ca7 · cites it 2× “The IDEA's presumption in favor of educating a disabled student with his nondisabled peers ( see ante at 1066, citing 20 U.S.C. § 1412 (a)(5)(A)) does not permit a school district to circumvent the procedures that Congress has mandated by predetermining that a disabled student…”

S.B. v. Cal. Dep't of Educ. (2018) caed “§ 1412 (a)(5), as close as possible to a student's home as required by 34 C.F.R. § 300.116 (b)(3) and California Education Code § 56342.”

T.B. v. Prince George's Cnty. Bd. of Educ. (2018) ca4 “The premise of the IDEA is that struggling students sometimes owe their difficulties to a disability that special education services could remedy.”

O.O. Ex Rel. Pabo v. District of Columbia (2008) dcd · cites it 2× “at 11 (citing 34 C.F.R. § 300.116 (b) and § 300.324(b)).”

Lofton Ex Rel. T.C. v. District of Columbia (2013) dcd · cites it 2× “§ 1401 (9); 34 C.F.R. § 300.116 (2012) (providing that the child’s educational placement “[i]s based on the child’s IEP”).”

Y.B. v. Howell Township Board of Educa (2021) ca3 “”12 Second, even though the Lakewood IEP’s placement was determined in accordance with state procedures, we do not think that Howell should be bound by all of Lakewood’s decisions.”

Show all 93 citing cases →

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.