## Facts

- Rafael Oberti, a child with Down syndrome, was eligible for special-education services under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA).
- The school district recommended a segregated special-education placement; Rafael’s parents objected and pursued administrative review.
- The district placed Rafael part-time in a regular “developmental kindergarten” without an individualized curriculum, behavior-management plan, or supplementary aids and services for Rafael or his teacher.
- After Rafael exhibited disruptive behaviors, the district relied on those behaviors to support removing him to a self-contained, out-of-district special-education program.
- Expert evidence indicated Rafael could obtain educational benefit in a regular classroom if provided appropriate supports and a structured program.

## Issues

1. Whether the district complied with the IDEA requirement that children with disabilities be educated with nondisabled peers to the maximum extent appropriate, with removal from regular classes only when education there cannot be achieved satisfactorily with supplementary aids and services.
2. What analytical framework governs IDEA least restrictive environment (LRE) disputes, and which party bears the burden of proving compliance with the LRE mandate.
3. Whether the district’s conduct also violated § 504 of the Rehabilitation Act.

## Decision

- The Third Circuit affirmed the district court’s judgment for the parents.
- The court held the district failed the IDEA mainstreaming/LRE requirement by not making sufficient efforts to educate Rafael in a regular classroom with supplementary aids and services before moving to a segregated placement.
- The court agreed that behavioral concerns could not justify removal where the district had not implemented reasonable supports and planning to address those concerns in the regular setting.
- The court upheld relief requiring an inclusive placement consistent with the IDEA’s LRE mandate, with appropriate supplementary aids and services.

## Legal Principles

- IDEA LRE rule: children with disabilities must be educated with nondisabled peers to the maximum extent appropriate; removal from regular classes is permitted only when satisfactory education in regular classes cannot be achieved with supplementary aids and services.
- LRE analysis (often described as the “Oberti test”):
  - First, determine whether education in the regular classroom with supplementary aids and services can be achieved satisfactorily, considering (among other factors) the district’s accommodation efforts, comparative educational benefits, and effects on other students.
  - Second, if full-time regular-class placement is not appropriate, determine whether the district has mainstreamed the student to the maximum extent appropriate through partial inclusion and participation in nonacademic and extracurricular activities.
- Burden of proof: once parents challenge a segregated placement, the school district bears the burden to show it complied with the LRE requirement and that regular-class placement with aids and services could not be achieved satisfactorily.
- Disruptive behavior must be evaluated in light of available supports and behavior-management strategies; it does not, by itself, establish that regular-class placement is unsatisfactory.

## Conclusion

The Third Circuit required school districts to treat inclusion in regular classrooms as the starting point under IDEA and to prove, with evidence of meaningful supports and considered alternatives, that removal to a segregated setting is necessary to satisfy the LRE mandate.


Oberti v. Bd. of Educ. of the Borough of Clementon Sch. Dist., 995 F.2d 1204 (3d Cir. 1993)