Part two - Evidence and law
What the law requires
Child Find, FAPE, LRE, and the two-part test, in plain language.
What the law requires
Open each one to read it in plain language.
IDEA, the two-part test
A student is eligible only if they (1) have a qualifying disability and (2) because of it, need specially designed instruction. Qualifying is not the same as needing services everywhere. 20 U.S.C. section 1400 et seq.
Child Find
Schools have an affirmative duty to identify, locate, and evaluate students who may have a disability. The duty to assess is triggered when a disability is only suspected, through parent concern, professional opinion, or the student's own behavior. It is a duty to look, not a favor to grant. Timothy O. v. Paso Robles USD, 9th Cir. 2016
Least Restrictive Environment
To the fullest extent appropriate, disabled students are educated with students who are not disabled. Placement is an individualized decision that begins in general education with support. The team must justify removal from general education, not the reverse. In California, the Rachel H. factors weigh the academic and social benefits of general education, the effect on others, and cost. 20 U.S.C. section 1412(a)(5); Sacramento City USD v. Rachel H., 9th Cir. 1994
FAPE, and what "appropriate" means
A free appropriate public education guarantees a basic floor of opportunity: instruction reasonably calculated to enable progress appropriate in light of the child's circumstances. It does not require a school to maximize a student's potential, and it does not require every service an expert might recommend. Appropriate is the standard, not optimal. Rowley, 1982; Endrew F., 2017
The continuum of placement
Placement is not a single destination. The continuum includes regular classes, special classes, special schools, home instruction, hospitals and institutions, and other California program options. Specially designed instruction can occur across settings; it is not a stop on the placement continuum. Think of it as on ramps, not one bridge. Every student merges onto grade-level access from a different starting point. Teams move only as far along the continuum as a student's documented need requires, and always with the goal of returning the student toward the least restrictive setting that works. 34 C.F.R. section 300.115; Ed. Code section 56361
Predetermination
A district must genuinely consider the full range of supplementary aids and services in general education before selecting a more restrictive placement. Predetermination, arriving at a meeting wedded to one outcome, is a procedural violation because it shuts out the family. Oberti, 3d Cir. 1993; Deal v. Hamilton County, 6th Cir. 2004
Two kinds of duties: procedural and substantive. IDEA holds teams to both. Procedural duties are the when and how of the process, such as getting consent before an evaluation, holding the meeting at least once a year, and having the required members at the table. Substantive duties are the what, meaning services actually designed to be reasonably calculated for educational benefit in light of the child's circumstances. Missing either one can add up to a denial of FAPE, so a clean process and a sound plan are not the same thing and a team needs both (High Quality IEPs, 2024).
Begin with access and supports
Consider instruction in regular classes with the supplementary aids and services the student needs.
Make the documented choice
Use evaluation and IEP data to select the least restrictive setting that works for this student.
Part two - Evidence and law
Case law foundations
Open each case to see what it settled.
Board of Education v. Rowley
FAPE is a basic floor of opportunity, an appropriate education, not the best possible one. Teams can honor a family's hopes while being honest about the standard. 458 U.S. 176 (1982)
Endrew F. v. Douglas County
The IEP must be reasonably calculated for progress that is appropriately ambitious in light of the child's circumstances. Merely more-than-nothing is not enough. 580 U.S. 386 (2017)
Sacramento City USD v. Rachel H.
California's four-factor LRE test: academic benefit, non-academic benefit, effect on others, and cost. Placement talks walk through these four factors, with data. 14 F.3d 1398 (9th Cir. 1994)
Larry P. v. Riles
Biased assessment placed Black students into segregated classes at discriminatory rates. Identification itself can tip the scale the wrong way. Check the data, not the assumption. 793 F.2d 969 (9th Cir. 1984)