34 C.F.R. § 300.302
Screening for instructional purposes is not evaluation
The screening of a student by a teacher or specialist to determine appropriate instructional strategies for curriculum implementation shall not be considered to be an evaluation for eligibility for special education and related services.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 59
cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1982–2022 · leading case: Richardson Indep. Sch. Dist. v. Michael Z Ex Rel. Leah Z, 580 F.3d 286 (5th Cir. 2009).
Richardson Indep. Sch. Dist. v. Michael Z Ex Rel. Leah Z, 580 F.3d 286 (5th Cir. 2009). “" 34 C.F.R. § 300.302 . Thus, it is clear that, in some situations, a public school district must reimburse a disabled child's parents for the costs of a private residential program.”
Tennessee Dep't of Mental Health & Mental Retardation v. Paul B. & the Hamilton Cnty. Bd. of Educ., 88 F.3d 1466 (6th Cir. 1996). “§§ 1401 (a)(16)(A), 1413(a)(4)(B); 34 C.F.R. §§ 300.302 and 300.551. The controlling regulation provides: If placement in a public or private residential program is neeessary to provide special education and related services to a child with a disability, the program, including…”
Robert Walczak & Karen Walczak v. Florida Union Free Sch. Dist. & Maureen Flaherty, 142 F.3d 119 (2d Cir. 1998). “See 34 C.F.R. § 300.302 (1998); Mrs. B. v. Milford Bd.”
Parks v. Pavkovic, 536 F. Supp. 296 (N.D. Ill. 1982). “34 C.F.R. § 300.302 (1981). See Sen.Conf.”
D.B. v. Ocean Twp. Bd. of Educ., 985 F. Supp. 457 (D.N.J. 1997). “§ 1413(a)(4)(B) (discussing state plans); 34 C.F.R. § 300.302 . 28 Courts have addressed the issue of whether residential placement was the least restrictive educational environment in an ever-increasing number of individual case determinations under IDEA.”
Indep. Sch. Dist. No. 284, Wayzata Area Schs., Wayzata, Minnesota v. A.C., by & Through Her Parent, C.C., 258 F.3d 769 (8th Cir. 2001). “” 34 C.F.R. § 300.302 (2000). The reason for this rule is straightforward: if a residential placement is educationally necessary because of a student’s disability, and the state does not provide it, then the state’s IEP is not “reasonably calculated to enable the child to…”
Daniel Abrahamson, Etc. v. Corrine Hershman, Etc., 701 F.2d 223 (1st Cir. 1983). “34 C.F.R. § 300.302 . We thus believe that the district court had ample authority under the Act, as construed by the Secretary, to order Daniel’s placement in a suitable residential program upon finding that a residential placement was essential if Daniel was to receive the…”
Floretta McKenzie Superintendent, D.C. Pub. Schs. v. Christopher Smith, by His Parents, 771 F.2d 1527 (D.C. Cir. 1985). “§§ 1401 (16), 1413(a)(4)(B); 34 C.F.R. §§ 300.302 , 551. To determine whether a residential placement is appropriate, a court must analyze “whether full-time placement may be considered necessary for educational purposes, or whether the residential placement is a response to…”
Richard B. Manecke v. Sch. Bd. of Pinellas Cnty., Florida, Etc., 762 F.2d 912 (11th Cir. 1985). “§ 1415 , establish and maintain procedural safeguards. Among these is the requirement that parents be given the opportunity to contest virtually any matter concerning the educational placement of the handicapped child, or the provision of a “free appropriate public education” to…”
Colin & Alan K., Minors by John K., Their Next Friend & Father v. Thomas C. Schmidt, Middletown Sch. Comm., Colin K. v. Thomas C. Schmidt, 715 F.2d 1 (1st Cir. 1983). “§ 1401 (16); 34 C.F.R. § 300.302 . 6 . By agreement of the parties, plaintiffs had been placed at Landmark for the 1980-81 and 1981-82 academic years.”
Ojai Unified Sch. Dist. v. Jackson, 4 F.3d 1467 (9th Cir. 1993). “” 34 C.F.R. § 300.302 (1992). The commentary to this regulation explains that “[t]his requirement applies to placements which are made by public agencies for educational purposes, and includes placements in State-operated schools for the handicapped, such as a State school for…”
Ashland Sch. Dist. v. Parents of Student R.J., 588 F.3d 1004 (9th Cir. 2009). “The requirement that the residential placement be necessary furthers the IDEA’S purposes of assuring that “children with disabilities, including children in ... private institutions .”
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.