C.F.R. » Title 34 » CHAPTER III—OFFICE OF SPECIAL EDUCATION AND REHABILITATIVE SERVICES, DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION › PART 361—STATE VOCATIONAL REHABILITATION SERVICES PROGRAM › Subpart B—State Plan and Other Requirements for Vocational Rehabilitation Services

34 C.F.R. § 361.50

Written policies governing the provision of services for individuals with disabilities

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

(a) Policies. The State unit must develop and maintain written policies covering the nature and scope of each of the vocational rehabilitation services specified in § 361.48 and the criteria under which each service is provided. The policies must ensure that the provision of services is based on the rehabilitation needs of each individual as identified in that individual's individualized plan for employment and is consistent with the individual's informed choice. The written policies may not establish any arbitrary limits on the nature and scope of vocational rehabilitation services to be provided to the individual to achieve an employment outcome. The policies must be developed in accordance with the following provisions:

(b) Out-of-State services. (1) The State unit may establish a preference for in-State services, provided that the preference does not effectively deny an individual a necessary service. If the individual chooses an out-of-State service at a higher cost than an in-State service, if either service would meet the individual's rehabilitation needs, the designated State unit is not responsible for those costs in excess of the cost of the in-State service.

(2) The State unit may not establish policies that effectively prohibit the provision of out-of-State services.

(c) Payment for services. (1) The State unit must establish and maintain written policies to govern the rates of payment for all purchased vocational rehabilitation services.

(2) The State unit may establish a fee schedule designed to ensure a reasonable cost to the program for each service, if the schedule is—

(i) Not so low as to effectively deny an individual a necessary service; and

(ii) Not absolute and permits exceptions so that individual needs can be addressed.

(3) The State unit may not place absolute dollar limits on specific service categories or on the total services provided to an individual.

(d) Duration of services. (1) The State unit may establish reasonable time periods for the provision of services provided that the time periods are—

(i) Not so short as to effectively deny an individual a necessary service; and

(ii) Not absolute and permit exceptions so that individual needs can be addressed.

(2) The State unit may not establish absolute time limits on the provision of specific services or on the provision of services to an individual. The duration of each service needed by an individual must be determined on an individual basis and reflected in that individual's individualized plan for employment.

(e) Authorization of services. The State unit must establish policies related to the timely authorization of services, including any conditions under which verbal authorization can be given.

(Authority: Sections 12(c) and 101(a)(6) of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended and 29 U.S.C. 709(c) and 721(a)(6))
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 16 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1992–2024 · leading case: Williams v. Dep't of Human Servs. Div. of Rehab. Servs., 2019 IL App (1st) 181517 (Ill. App. Ct. 2020).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Williams v. Dep't of Human Servs. Div. of Rehab. Servs., 2019 IL App (1st) 181517 (Ill. App. Ct. 2020). · cites it 6× “” ¶ 24 The title of the federal regulation he relies on, 34 C.F.R. § 361.50 (2016), indicates that the law concerns a state agency’s “Written policies governing the provision of services for individuals with disabilities.”
Sharon P. Diamond v. State of Michigan, Michigan Dep't of Career Dev./Rehab. Servs., 431 F.3d 262 (6th Cir. 2005). · cites it 2× “Under 34 C.F.R. § 361.50 (d)(2) a state agency may under the Act place an expected end date on an eligible individual’s IPE.”
JACKIE S. v. Connelly, 442 F. Supp. 2d 503 (S.D. Ohio 2006). · cites it 2× “34 C.F.R. § 361.50 — Written policies governing the provision of services for individuals with disabilities.”
Yochim v. Gargano, 882 F. Supp. 2d 1068 (S.D. Ind. 2012). “” 34 C.F.R. § 361.50 (b)(1) (emphasis added); see also Wasser v.”
Wasser v. New York State Off. of Vocational & Educ. Servs. for Individuals with Disabilities, 683 F. Supp. 2d 201 (E.D.N.Y 2008). “See 34 C.F.R. § 361.50 (b)(1) (“The State unit may establish a preference for in-State services, provided that the preference does not effectively deny an individual a necessary service.”
Weiss v. Indiana Fam. & Soc. Servs. Admin., Div. of Disability, Aging & Rehabilitative Servs., 741 N.E.2d 398 (Ind. Ct. App. 2000). · cites it 3× “See 34 C.F.R. § 361.50 (1999) (“The State plan must assure that the State unit develops and maintains written policies covering the nature and scope of each of the vocational rehabilitation services .”
Dolon v. Fam. & Soc. Servs. Admin. Div. of Disability, Aging & Rehabilitative Servs., 715 N.E.2d 917 (Ind. Ct. App. 1999). · cites it 3× “First, is 34 C.F.R. § 361.50 , which provides that “[t]he written policies [of the State agency] may not establish any arbitrary limits on the nature and scope of vocational rehabilitation services to be provided to the individual to achieve an employment outcome.”
Weiss v. Indiana Fssa, 741 N.E.2d 398 (Ind. Ct. App. 2000). · cites it 3× “See 34 C.F.R. § 361.50 (1999) ("The State plan must assure that the State unit develops and maintains written policies covering the nature and scope of each of the vocational rehabilitation services.”
Doe v. Dept. of Rehab. (Cal. Ct. App. 2024). · cites it 3× “” ( 34 C.F.R. § 361.50 (a) (2022).) The policies must ensure services are provided “based on the rehabilitation needs of each individual as identified in that individual’s [IPE].”
Garrett v. Opportunities for Ohioans with Disabilities (S.D. Ohio 2022). · cites it 2× “” 34 C.F.R. § 361.50 (a). The OOD must also ensure that VR services are available to assist the disabled individual “in preparing for, securing, retaining, advancing in or regaining an employment outcome that is consistent with the individual’s unique strengths, resources,…”
Wasser v. Ny State Off. of Voc. & Educ. Servs., 683 F. Supp. 2d 201 (E.D.N.Y 2008). “See 34 C.F.R. § 361.50 (b)(1) ("The State unit may establish a preference for in-State services, provided that the preference does not effectively deny an individual a necessary service.”
Diamond v. State of MI (6th Cir. 2005). · cites it 2× “34 C.F.R. § 361.50 (d)(2). Thus, the expected end date placed on Diamond’s May, 2000, IPE by MRS was not improper and, accordingly, her IPE expired on its expected end date of November, 2000.”
Show all 16 citing cases →
— 34 C.F.R. § 361.50(d)(2) — 1 case
Diamond v. State of MI (6th Cir. 2005). “34 C.F.R. § 361.50 (d)(2). Thus, the expected end date placed on Diamond’s May, 2000, IPE by MRS was not improper and, accordingly, her IPE expired on its expected end date of November, 2000.”
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.