## Facts

- Homeless mothers sued the District of Columbia, its mayor, public schools, and school officials on behalf of their school-age children, seeking declaratory and injunctive relief under the Stewart B. McKinney Homeless Assistance Act.
- Homeless families were required to register with an emergency shelter office that placed them on a waiting list and determined homelessness through a process that could take weeks before assigning a family shelter placement.
- Only after placement in a designated family shelter did the school system’s homeless-student unit begin arranging enrollment and services, leaving children out of school during the intake and placement period.
- The District provided transportation assistance on a limited basis (e.g., distributing transit tokens infrequently) and did not reliably ensure transportation for children who lived more than a specified distance from their school.
- Plaintiffs alleged these delays and transportation practices functioned as barriers to enrollment, attendance, and retention in the school that was in each child’s best interest.

## Issues

1. Whether the District violated the McKinney Act by failing to address the educational needs of homeless children in a timely fashion due to its intake and shelter-placement sequencing.
2. Whether the District violated the McKinney Act by failing to provide access to adequate transportation and by maintaining transportation policies that created barriers to enrollment and regular attendance.

## Decision

- Defendants’ motion to dismiss or, alternatively, for summary judgment was denied.
- Plaintiffs’ cross-motion for summary judgment was granted.
- The court held the District violated 42 U.S.C. §§ 11432(e)(3), (8), and (9) by failing to address homeless children’s educational needs in a timely fashion.
- The court held the District violated 42 U.S.C. §§ 11432(e)(1)(G) and (9) by failing to provide homeless children access to adequate transportation to and from school.
- The court ordered declaratory and injunctive relief requiring changes to identification, enrollment, school placement, and transportation practices, including prompt provision of educational access after intake and revision of transportation policies that impeded attendance.

## Legal Principles

- The McKinney Act’s education provisions at issue create enforceable individual rights that may be vindicated through 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
- A jurisdiction violates the Act when its procedures predictably leave homeless children out of school for extended periods after seeking assistance, contrary to the requirement of timely attention to educational needs.
- Transportation assistance must be sufficient to permit homeless children to enroll in and attend the school that is in their best interest; practices that delay or restrict transportation in a way that impedes attendance are unlawful barriers under the Act.
- Local policies are unlawful where they conflict with the Act’s text and purpose of eliminating practical obstacles to enrollment, attendance, and retention for homeless students.

## Conclusion

The court found that District policies delaying school access until after shelter placement and providing unreliable transportation unlawfully impeded homeless children’s education under the McKinney Act, and it granted summary judgment for plaintiffs with declaratory and injunctive relief mandating prompt enrollment and adequate transportation.


Lampkin v. District of Columbia, 879 F. Supp. 116 (D.D.C. 1995)