## Facts

- A public school district identified Donald B., a minor child with a speech impairment, as eligible for special education services under the IDEA.
- Donald’s mother unilaterally enrolled him in a private parochial school (St. Paul’s).
- A nearby public school (Austin), about three city blocks away, offered speech therapy.
- The district agreed to provide speech therapy to Donald at the public school as part of an IEP, but refused (1) to transport him between the private and public schools or (2) to send a therapist to the private school.
- Donald’s disability affected speech only; the record did not show disability-related mobility limits or other facts making the three-block distance inaccessible.
- After an adverse administrative decision, the district court entered judgment as a matter of law for the district on a stipulated record; Donald appealed.

## Issues

1. Whether the IDEA required the district to provide transportation as a “related service” for a parentally placed private-school child to travel three blocks to a public school for speech therapy.
2. Whether the IDEA required the district to deliver speech therapy on-site at the child’s private school rather than at the public school.

## Decision

- The Eleventh Circuit affirmed the judgment for the school district.
- The IDEA did not obligate the district to transport Donald between the private school and the nearby public school where speech therapy was offered.
- The IDEA did not obligate the district to provide speech therapy at the private school.

## Legal Principles

- Under the IDEA, “related services” (including transportation) are required only when necessary to assist a child with a disability to benefit from special education.
- For a parentally placed private-school student, the IDEA requires meaningful access and equitable participation in IDEA-funded services, not the same configuration of individualized services available to public-school enrollees.
- A district may satisfy its IDEA obligations to a parentally placed private-school child by offering services at a public-school site, absent evidence that the child’s disability or other circumstances make that arrangement effectively inaccessible.
- Parental preference for convenience or location does not, by itself, expand a district’s duty to provide transportation or duplicate services at a private school.

## Conclusion

Because Donald’s speech impairment did not affect his ability to reach the nearby public school and the record showed no barriers making the offered therapy effectively unavailable, the district complied with the IDEA by providing speech therapy at the public school without transportation or on-site services at the private school.


Donald B. v. Bd. of Sch. Comm’rs of Mobile Cnty., 117 F.3d 1371 (11th Cir. 1997)