About this product

Product Identifiers

PublisherIndependently Published

ISBN-101729425771

ISBN-139781729425770

eBay Product ID (ePID)2309551742

Product Key Features

Book TitleFree Appropriate Public Education: Ieps and the Idea

Number of Pages550 Pages

LanguageEnglish

Publication Year2018

TopicEducational Law & Legislation

GenreLaw

AuthorLandmark Publications

FormatTrade Paperback

Dimensions

Item Height1.2 in

Item Weight32.2 Oz

Item Length9 in

Item Width6 in

Additional Product Features

Intended AudienceTrade

SynopsisTHIS CASEBOOK contains a selection of U. S. Court of Appeals decisions that analyze, interpret and apply provisions of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. * * * The IDEA offers states partial federal funding for special education of children with qualifying disabilities. 20 U.S.C. 1412(a). In exchange, states receiving IDEA funds commit to providing all of those disabled children within their jurisdiction "a free appropriate public education ('FAPE') in the least restrictive environment possible." Sebastian M. v. King Philip Reg'l Sch. Dist., 685 F.3d 79, 81 (1st Cir. 2012)(citing 20 U.S.C. 1412(a)(1), (5)). A FAPE must include both "specially designed instruction, at no cost to parents, to meet the unique needs of a child with a disability" and "such developmental, corrective, and other supportive services. . . as may be required to assist a child with a disability to benefit from special education." 20 U.S.C. 1401(9), (26), (29). "If a school system is unable to furnish a disabled child with a FAPE through a public school placement, it may be obliged to subsidize the child in a private program." D.B. ex rel. Elizabeth B. v. Esposito, 675 F.3d 26, 34 (1st Cir. 2012)(quotation marks and citation omitted). * * * "The primary vehicle for delivery of a FAPE" is an Individualized Education Program ("IEP"). Id. (internal quotation marks and citations omitted). "An IEP must be custom-tailored to suit a particular child," Sebastian M., 685 F.3d at 84(citation omitted), and must be "reasonably calculated to enable a child to make progress appropriate in light of the child's circumstances," Endrew F. ex rel. Joseph F. v. Douglas Cty. Sch. Dist. RE-1, ___ U.S. ___, 137 S. Ct. 988, 999 (2017). An IEP need not, however, offer the student "an optimal or an ideal level of educational benefit .]" Lessard v. Wilton Lyndeborough Coop. Sch. Dist. (Lessard I), 518 F.3d 18, 23-24 (1st Cir. 2008)(citations omitted)., THIS CASEBOOK contains a selection of U. S. Court of Appeals decisions that analyze, interpret and apply provisions of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. * * * The IDEA offers states partial federal funding for special education of children with qualifying disabilities. 20 U.S.C. § 1412(a). In exchange, states receiving IDEA funds commit to providing all of those disabled children within their jurisdiction "a free appropriate public education ('FAPE') in the least restrictive environment possible." Sebastian M. v. King Philip Reg'l Sch. Dist., 685 F.3d 79, 81 (1st Cir. 2012)(citing 20 U.S.C. § 1412(a)(1), (5)). A FAPE must include both "specially designed instruction, at no cost to parents, to meet the unique needs of a child with a disability" and "such developmental, corrective, and other supportive services. . . as may be required to assist a child with a disability to benefit from special education." 20 U.S.C. § 1401(9), (26), (29). "If a school system is unable to furnish a disabled child with a FAPE through a public school placement, it may be obliged to subsidize the child in a private program." D.B. ex rel. Elizabeth B. v. Esposito, 675 F.3d 26, 34 (1st Cir. 2012)(quotation marks and citation omitted). * * * "The primary vehicle for delivery of a FAPE" is an Individualized Education Program ("IEP"). Id. (internal quotation marks and citations omitted). "An IEP must be custom-tailored to suit a particular child," Sebastian M., 685 F.3d at 84(citation omitted), and must be "reasonably calculated to enable a child to make progress appropriate in light of the child's circumstances," Endrew F. ex rel. Joseph F. v. Douglas Cty. Sch. Dist. RE-1, ___ U.S. ___, 137 S. Ct. 988, 999 (2017). An IEP need not, however, offer the student "an optimal or an ideal level of educational benefit[.]" Lessard v. Wilton Lyndeborough Coop. Sch. Dist. (Lessard I), 518 F.3d 18, 23-24 (1st Cir. 2008)(citations omitted).