34 C.F.R. § 300.24
Individualized family service plan
Individualized family service plan or IFSP has the meaning given the term in section 636 of the Act.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 26
cases, 2000–2018 · leading case: Diaz-Fonseca v. Commonwealth of PR, 451 F.3d 13 (1st Cir. 2006).
Diaz-Fonseca v. Commonwealth of PR, 451 F.3d 13 (1st Cir. 2006). “Pointing to a provision of the IDEA, which states that the cost of reimbursement “may be reduced or denied” in certain circumstances, such as “upon a judicial finding of unreasonableness with respect to actions taken by the parents,” 20 *32 U.S.C. § 1412(a)(10)(C)(iii),…”
Dep't of Educ., St. of Hawaii v. Cari Rae S., 158 F. Supp. 2d 1190 (D. Haw. 2001). “§ 1401 (8) and 34 C.F.R. § 300.24 (a). See also 34 C.F.R.”
Dist. of Columbia v. Ramirez, 377 F. Supp. 2d 63 (D.D.C. 2005). “” 34 C.F.R. § 300.24 (a), (b)(15)(I); D.C. Mun.”
Handberry v. Thompson, 436 F.3d 52 (2d Cir. 2006). “34 C.F.R. § 300.24 (a). The district court found that the space provided for such counseling was inadequate.”
Cheryl Blanchard v. Morton Sch. Dist. Russ Davis Regine Aleksunas, Se Teacher Jim Grossman, Slp Robyn Goodwin, Principal, 420 F.3d 918 (9th Cir. 2005). “” 34 C.F.R. § 300.24 (b)(9)(v). The act thus has some provision for counseling parents, but only with respect to assisting the child.”
Holman v. Dist. of Columbia, 153 F. Supp. 3d 386 (D.D.C. 2016). “§ 1414(d)(1)(B); 34 C.F.R. § 300.24 (a). “[T]he IEP must, at a minimum, provide personalized instruction with sufficient support services to permit the child to benefit educationally from that instruction .”
Robin v. Teacher Standards & Practices Comm'n, 421 P.3d 385 (Or. Ct. App. 2018). “See generally 34 CFR 300.24 ; OAR 581-015-2225. As part of the process of developing and reviewing an IEP, a school district schedules a meeting with the parents of the child, who are also part of the IEP team.”
I v. Maine Sch. Admin. Dist. 55, 416 F. Supp. 2d 147 (D. Me. 2006). “” 34 C.F.R. § 300.24 (a). The regulation further lists the included services: those possibly implicated here are “speech-language pathology,” “psychological services,” “counseling services,” “medical services for diagnostic or evaluation purposes,” “school health services,”…”
Winkelman v. Parma City Sch. Dist., 411 F. Supp. 2d 722 (N.D. Ohio 2005). “” 34 C.F.R. § 300.24 (5) (2005). Here, Jacob’s 2003-04 IEP identifies his present performance levels for occupational therapy.”
Barnett v. Baldwin Cnty. Bd. of Educ., 60 F. Supp. 3d 1216 (S.D. Ala. 2014). “See 34 C.F.R. § 300.24 (2006) (defining ‘related services’ as ‘supportive services as are required to assist *1228 a child with a disability to benefit from special education’).”
Evanston Cmty. Consol. Sch. Dist. No. 65 v. Michael M., 356 F.3d 798 (7th Cir. 2004). “In fact, specifi- cally as to occupational therapy, 34 C.F.R. § 300.24 (b)(5)(I) refers to “services provided by a qualified occupational therapist.”
Robb v. Bethel Sch. Dist. 403, 308 F.3d 1047 (9th Cir. 2002). “” 34 C.F.R. § 300.24 (b)(9)(v). This battery of educational, psychological, and counseling services could go a long way to correct past wrongdoing by helping Ms.”
— 34 C.F.R. § 300.24(a) — 2 cases
Dep't of Educ., St. of Hawaii v. Cari Rae S., 158 F. Supp. 2d 1190 (D. Haw. 2001). “§ 1401 (8) and 34 C.F.R. § 300.24 (a). See also 34 C.F.R.”
Gwinnett Cnty. Sch. Dist. v. JB Ex Rel. DB, 398 F. Supp. 2d 1245 (N.D. Ga. 2005).
— 34 C.F.R. § 300.24(b)(5)(ii) — 1 case
Gwinnett Cnty. Sch. Dist. v. JB Ex Rel. DB, 398 F. Supp. 2d 1245 (N.D. Ga. 2005).
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.