C.F.R. » Title 34 » CHAPTER III—OFFICE OF SPECIAL EDUCATION AND REHABILITATIVE SERVICES, DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION › PART 300—ASSISTANCE TO STATES FOR THE EDUCATION OF CHILDREN WITH DISABILITIES › Subpart D—Evaluations, Eligibility Determinations, Individualized Education Programs, and Educational Placements

34 C.F.R. § 300.322

Parent participation

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

(a) Public agency responsibility—general. Each public agency must take steps to ensure that one or both of the parents of a child with a disability are present at each IEP Team meeting or are afforded the opportunity to participate, including—

(1) Notifying parents of the meeting early enough to ensure that they will have an opportunity to attend; and

(2) Scheduling the meeting at a mutually agreed on time and place.

(b) Information provided to parents. (1) The notice required under paragraph (a)(1) of this section must—

(i) Indicate the purpose, time, and location of the meeting and who will be in attendance; and

(ii) Inform the parents of the provisions in § 300.321(a)(6) and (c) (relating to the participation of other individuals on the IEP Team who have knowledge or special expertise about the child), and § 300.321(f) (relating to the participation of the Part C service coordinator or other representatives of the Part C system at the initial IEP Team meeting for a child previously served under Part C of the Act).

(2) For a child with a disability beginning not later than the first IEP to be in effect when the child turns 16, or younger if determined appropriate by the IEP Team, the notice also must—

(i) Indicate—

(A) That a purpose of the meeting will be the consideration of the postsecondary goals and transition services for the child, in accordance with § 300.320(b); and

(B) That the agency will invite the student; and

(ii) Identify any other agency that will be invited to send a representative.

(c) Other methods to ensure parent participation. If neither parent can attend an IEP Team meeting, the public agency must use other methods to ensure parent participation, including individual or conference telephone calls, consistent with § 300.328 (related to alternative means of meeting participation).

(d) Conducting an IEP Team meeting without a parent in attendance. A meeting may be conducted without a parent in attendance if the public agency is unable to convince the parents that they should attend. In this case, the public agency must keep a record of its attempts to arrange a mutually agreed on time and place, such as—

(1) Detailed records of telephone calls made or attempted and the results of those calls;

(2) Copies of correspondence sent to the parents and any responses received; and

(3) Detailed records of visits made to the parent's home or place of employment and the results of those visits.

(e) Use of interpreters or other action, as appropriate. The public agency must take whatever action is necessary to ensure that the parent understands the proceedings of the IEP Team meeting, including arranging for an interpreter for parents with deafness or whose native language is other than English.

(f) Parent copy of child's IEP. The public agency must give the parent a copy of the child's IEP at no cost to the parent.

(Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1414(d)(1)(B)(i))
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 57 cases (13 in the last 5 years), 2006–2025 · leading case: Doug C. Ex Rel. Spencer C. v. State of Hawaii Dep't of Educ., 720 F.3d 1038 (9th Cir. 2013).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Doug C. Ex Rel. Spencer C. v. State of Hawaii Dep't of Educ., 720 F.3d 1038 (9th Cir. 2013). · cites it 4× “” 34 C.F.R. § 300.322 (a). Moreover, if a parent cannot attend, the agency must offer other methods of participation such as video or teleconferencing.”
T.R. v. Sch. Dist. of Philadelphi, 4 F.4th 179 (3rd Cir. 2021). · cites it 2× “” 34 C.F.R. § 300.322 (f) (regulation on “Parent participation” for IEP Team meetings).”
Jacquie Albright v. Mountain Home Sch. Dist., 926 F.3d 942 (8th Cir. 2019). “" 34 C.F.R. § 300.322 (d) (2006) ; see Lathrop R-II Sch.”
A.L. v. Jackson Cnty. Sch. Bd., 635 F. App'x 774 (11th Cir. 2015). · cites it 3× “322 , entitled “Parent Participation,” generally provides that a school board must take steps to ensure that one or both parents of a child with a disability are present at each IEP meeting or are afforded the opportunity to participate.”
R.F. v. Cecil Cnty. Pub. Schs., 919 F.3d 237 (4th Cir. 2019). “§ 1415 (b) ; see 34 C.F.R. § 300.322 (setting out parent participation regulations for IEP development).”
T.R. v. Sch. Dist. of Philadelphia, 223 F. Supp. 3d 321 (E.D. Pa. 2016). · cites it 2× “” 34 C.F.R. § 300.322 (b)(l)-(2). The IDEA contains procedural safeguards designed, in part, to ensure “that families of such children have meaningful opportunities to participate in the education of their children at school and at home.”
K.E. Ex Rel. K.E. v. Indep. Sch. Dist. No. 15, 647 F.3d 795 (8th Cir. 2011). · cites it 2× “, the District violated IDEA procedures by denying Parent a meaningful opportunity to participate in the IEP process. In particular, she asserts that the District gave inadequate notice to Parent of certain IEP team meetings, which Parent did not attend, see 34 C.”
Dallas Indep. Sch. Dist. v. Woody Ex Rel. K.W., 865 F.3d 303 (5th Cir. 2017). “See 34 C.F.R. § 300.322 . The parties agreed to meet on December 17.”
T.B. v. Prince George's Cnty. Bd. of Educ., 897 F.3d 566 (4th Cir. 2018). “" 34 C.F.R. § 300.322 (a)(2). See also Md. Code Regs.”
J.N. v. Dist. of Columbia, 677 F. Supp. 2d 314 (D.D.C. 2010). · cites it 2× “34 C.F.R. § 300.322 (a). However, “[a] meeting may be conducted without a parent in attendance if the public agency is unable to convince the parents that they should attend” and the agency makes detailed records of the attempts to contact the parent.”
N.W. v. Dist. of Columbia, 253 F. Supp. 3d 5 (D.D.C. 2017). “See generally 34 C.F.R. § 300.322 . However, the statute and regulations do not require that the placement be selected at the IEP meeting.”
Anchorage Sch. Dist. v. M.P., 689 F.3d 1047 (9th Cir. 2012). “For example, even when an educational agency "is unable to convince the parents that they should attend” an IEP team meeting, 34 C.F.R. § 300.322 (d), the implementing regulations do not permit the state or local educational agency to cancel the meeting.”
Show all 57 citing cases →
— 34 C.F.R. § 300.322(b) — 1 case
Andra Barton v. State Bd. for Educator Certification, 382 S.W.3d 405 (Tex. App. 2012).
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.