EndrewF. v.Douglas County School District Re-1, 798, F.3d 1329 (10th Cir. 2015), vacated and remanded, 137 S.Ct. 988, 580 U.S. ____ (2017).
5.
FersterD. (2009). Broken promises: When does a school’s failure to implement an individualized education program deny a disabled student a free and appropriate public education?Buffalo Public Interest Law Journal, 28, 71-91.
6.
Houston Independent School District v. Bobby R., 200 F.3d 341 (5th Cir. 2005).
7.
Individuals With Disabilities Education Act, 20 U.S.C. §§ 1400 et seq. (2006 & Supp. V. 2011).
8.
KingD. G. (2009). Van Duyn v. Baker School District: A “material” improvement in evaluating a school district’s failure to implement individualized education programs. Northwestern Journal of Law and Social Policy, 4(2), 457–486.
9.
NeoshoR-VSchool District v. Clark, 315 F.3d 1022 (8th Cir. 2003).
10.
Van Duyn v. Baker School District 5J, 502 F.3d 811, 815 (9th Cir. 2007).
11.
YellM.L. (2019). The law and special education (5th Ed.). Pearson.
12.
YellM.L.BuschT.W. (2012). Using curriculum-based measurement to develop educationally meaningful and legally sound individual education programs. In EspinC.McMasterK.RoseS.WaymanM. (Eds.) A Measure of Success: How Curriculum-Based Measurement Has Influenced Education and Learning (pp. 37-48). Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.
13.
ZirkelP.A.BauerE.T. (2016). The Third Dimension of FAPE under the IDEA: IEP Implementation, National Association of Administrative Law Judiciary, 36, 409-427.
14.
ZirkelP. A. (2017). Failure to implement the IEP: The third dimension of FAPE under the IDEA. Journal of Disability Policy Studies, 28(3), 174-179. https://doi.org/10.1177/1044207317732582