34 C.F.R. § 300.504

Procedural safeguards notice

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

(a) General. A copy of the procedural safeguards available to the parents of a child with a disability must be given to the parents only one time a school year, except that a copy also must be given to the parents—

(1) Upon initial referral or parent request for evaluation;

(2) Upon receipt of the first State complaint under §§ 300.151 through 300.153 and upon receipt of the first due process complaint under § 300.507 in a school year;

(3) In accordance with the discipline procedures in § 300.530(h); and

(4) Upon request by a parent.

(b) Internet Web site. A public agency may place a current copy of the procedural safeguards notice on its Internet Web site if a Web site exists.

(c) Contents. The procedural safeguards notice must include a full explanation of all of the procedural safeguards available under § 300.148, §§ 300.151 through 300.153, § 300.300, §§ 300.502 through 300.503, §§ 300.505 through 300.518, §§ 300.530 through 300.536 and §§ 300.610 through 300.625 relating to—

(1) Independent educational evaluations;

(2) Prior written notice;

(3) Parental consent;

(4) Access to education records;

(5) Opportunity to present and resolve complaints through the due process complaint and State complaint procedures, including—

(i) The time period in which to file a complaint;

(ii) The opportunity for the agency to resolve the complaint; and

(iii) The difference between the due process complaint and the State complaint procedures, including the jurisdiction of each procedure, what issues may be raised, filing and decisional timelines, and relevant procedures;

(6) The availability of mediation;

(7) The child's placement during the pendency of any due process complaint;

(8) Procedures for students who are subject to placement in an interim alternative educational setting;

(9) Requirements for unilateral placement by parents of children in private schools at public expense;

(10) Hearings on due process complaints, including requirements for disclosure of evaluation results and recommendations;

(11) State-level appeals (if applicable in the State);

(12) Civil actions, including the time period in which to file those actions; and

(13) Attorneys' fees.

(d) Notice in understandable language. The notice required under paragraph (a) of this section must meet the requirements of § 300.503(c).

(Approved by the Office of Management and Budget under control number 1820-0600) (Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1415(d)) [71 FR 46753, Aug. 14, 2006, as amended at 72 FR 61307, Oct. 30, 2007]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 73 cases (7 in the last 5 years), 1983–2025 · leading case: T.R. v. Sch. Dist. of Philadelphi, 4 F.4th 179 (3rd Cir. 2021).
T.R. v. Sch. Dist. of Philadelphi, 4 F.4th 179 (3rd Cir. 2021). · cites it 2× “§ 1415 (d)(1)(A); 34 C.F.R. § 300.504 (a). In Pennsylvania, this explanation is called the Procedural Safeguards Notice.”
M.M. v. Lafayette Sch. Dist., 767 F.3d 842 (9th Cir. 2014). · cites it 2× “First, the parents argue that the District withheld from them a procedural safeguards notice, which the District was required by 34 C.F.R. § 300.504 to make available to them, at the latest, upon the referral for C.”
Shirlene Hall v. Knott Cnty. Bd. of Educ., 941 F.2d 402 (6th Cir. 1991). · cites it 2× “This regulation, read in conjunction with 34 C.F.R. § 300.504 , says that before a public agency takes any of several actions listed in § 300.”
Max M. v. Thompson, 592 F. Supp. 1437 (N.D. Ill. 1984). · cites it 5× “34 C.F.R. § 300.504 (1983). The notice required by § 300.”
MM Ex Rel. DM v. Sch. Dist. of Greenville Cnty., 303 F.3d 523 (4th Cir. 2002). “; 34 C.F.R. § 300.504 . 15 Unlike the factual underpinnings of Enable and Burlington, the administrative decisionmakers in this case, and the district court as well, found that the District was willing to offer MM a FAPE, and that it had attempted to do so.”
Ms. S., for Herself & on Behalf of Her Daughter G. v. Vashon Island Sch. Dist. Off. of Superintendent of Pub. Instruction, 337 F.3d 1115 (9th Cir. 2003). “345 (1995) (requiring notice to the parents "early enough to ensure that they will have an opportunity to attend”), 34 C.F.R. §§ 300.504 -.505 (1995) (requiring written notice "a reasonable time” before a school proposes to initiate or change placement); WASH.”
Daniel R.R. v. State Bd. of Educ., El Paso Indep. Sch. Dist., 874 F.2d 1036 (5th Cir. 1989). “” 34 C.F.R. § 300.504 (a)(1) (1986). The regulations also prescribe the content of the notice: it must include “a description of the action proposed or refused by the agency, an explanation of why the agency proposes or refuses to take the action, and a description of any…”
Carroll Ex Rel. Carroll v. Capalbo, 563 F. Supp. 1053 (D.R.I. 1983). · cites it 3× “34 C.F.R. § 300.504 (b)(l)(i). It is, of course, uncontroverted here that the plaintiff has refused to consent to the assessment which Coventry is presently attempting to conduct.”
Donnie Weil, Et Ux. v. Bd. of Elementary & Secondary Educ., 931 F.2d 1069 (2d Cir. 1991). · cites it 2× “17:1952(B) (West 1982); 2 34 C.F.R. § 300.504 (1990). 3 We are not persuaded that the cited notice provisions were mandated in the instance of Kimberly’s transfer from Cooley to Kiroli because that transfer did not constitute a change in “educational placement” within the…”
Emily Thomas, Cross-Appellant v. Cincinnati Bd. of Educ., Cross-Appellee, 918 F.2d 618 (6th Cir. 1990). “§§ 1415 (b)(1) and (2) *625 and 34 C.F.R. § 300.504 (a)(12) which provide that parents of handicapped children must be given written notice before a public agency proposes to initiate or change the child’s educational placement.”
David Abney, by Next Friend Margaret Kantor v. Dist. of Columbia, 849 F.2d 1491 (D.C. Cir. 1988). · cites it 2× “*1496 § 1415(b)(1)(C); 34 C.F.R. § 300.504 . 3 The required notice must contain, inter alia, a complete description of the procedural safeguards available to the' parent or guardian, an official explanation for the proposed change, and reasons why other options were rejected.”
Tennessee Dep't of Mental Health & Mental Retardation v. Paul B. & the Hamilton Cnty. Bd. of Educ., 88 F.3d 1466 (6th Cir. 1996). “34 C.F.R. § 300.504 (a). The notification must include a full explanation of the procedural safeguards available to the parents, a *1472 description of the action proposed or refused, an explanation of why the action was proposed or refused, a description of any options the…”
— 34 C.F.R. § 300.504(b) — 2 cases
Carroll Ex Rel. Carroll v. Capalbo, 563 F. Supp. 1053 (D.R.I. 1983). “34 C.F.R. § 300.504 (b)(l)(i). It is, of course, uncontroverted here that the plaintiff has refused to consent to the assessment which Coventry is presently attempting to conduct.”
RR Ex Rel. Mr. R. v. Fairfax Cnty. Sch. Bd., 226 F. Supp. 2d 804 (E.D. Va. 2002).
— 34 C.F.R. § 300.504(b)(2) — 1 case
Howey Ex Rel. Howey v. Tippecanoe Sch. Corp., 734 F. Supp. 1485 (N.D. Ind. 1990).
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.