THE AMANAH INSTITUTE OF ABAS

Individualized Steward Learning & Support Policy

ABAS-ISSP-001 | 0.2 — Working Draft

PROPOSED — NOT ADOPTED

DRAFT — PENDING LEGAL, REGULATORY, AND INSTITUTIONAL APPROVAL

This proposed Institute-wide framework offers universal learning support to every Steward/Student and establishes an individualized process when a learning barrier requires ongoing adjustments. It supports all five Schools. The operative language below describes requirements proposed for adoption; it does not make this draft binding.

Document control

Authority clarification. The reviewed Master Blueprint Version 3.0 and Decision Register identify interim Founder authority, with recusal for material conflicts, followed by a permanent five-person governance structure when established. The proposed Director field above is retained as requested but does not establish Director adoption authority. Approval must follow the verified governance structure.

Baseline limitation. Version 0.1 and its user-edited text were not found in accessible Library or connected Drive searches. This is a provisional reconstruction using the master prompt’s sixteen foundational requirements and the institutional records listed in ABAS-ISSP-CROSSWALK-001. No line-by-line comparison to Version 0.1 is claimed. Its drafting history must be reconciled before adoption.

1 Purpose and Institutional Commitment

1.1 Institutional purpose

The Institute seeks to provide accessible, structured education rooted in the Qur’an and authentic Sunnah while respecting student dignity, compassion, academic integrity, confidentiality and appropriate accountability. Support shall help Stewards/Students engage with instruction and demonstrate learning without implying accreditation, university status, clinical services or designation as a special education provider.

1.2 Coordinated support

Universal Learning Support shall be offered to every Steward/Student in each School through clear instructions, accessible lesson formats, guided clarification, reasonable opportunities for questions and information about requesting support. Participation in a Learning Profile is voluntary. Individualized support shall be available when a specific learning barrier warrants ongoing adjustments. These are separate levels of one coordinated framework.

1.3 Proposed commitments

After lawful adoption, the Institute shall administer support consistently across Schools, subject to individual circumstances, applicable law and verified authority. Before adoption, any individual arrangement must rely on existing authorized policy and be documented separately; it may not be described as approved under this draft.

2 Legal Authority and Regulatory Applicability

2.1 Legal review remains open

No Institute-specific federal or state applicability conclusion has been verified by counsel. The research identifies conditional obligations, best practices and voluntary commitments. ABAS-ISSP-LEGAL-001 contains the verification matrix and source register. Research performed with AI is preparatory work, not a legal opinion or evidence of attorney review.

2.2 Federal disability framework

ADA Title II concerns public entities; public status is unverified. Title III generally covers qualifying private places of education but exempts religious organizations and entities controlled by religious organizations. An Islamic mission or religious curriculum alone is insufficient evidence for a definitive exemption conclusion. Counsel must examine formation and control records and the virtual program’s legal setting. Section 504 is tied to federal financial assistance and relevant program coverage; religious status does not automatically establish a Section 504 exemption. The applicable agency regulations and educational level require separate review. [L01–L04]

2.3 Children and educational classification

An ISSP is an internal educational support instrument, not a statutory IDEA IEP, an LEA services plan, or a statutory Section 504 plan. IDEA is not a general postsecondary entitlement. If the Institute serves eligible children in qualifying elementary or secondary programming, counsel must assess public placement, parent placement, child-find coordination and equitable services. An internal plan cannot replace public-agency duties or services. [L04–L06]

2.4 Privacy and state review

FERPA applicability depends on covered Department of Education funding and institutional status. HIPAA does not attach merely because staff receive a medical document. Texas disability access, adult-testing, information-security and breach provisions require fact-specific review. Texas consumer-data exclusions, including nonprofit and defined higher-education exclusions, shall not be presumed. Counsel must assess other states based on student location, organizational activity and data processing. [L07–L14]

2.5 Standards of interpretation

Applicable law controls where legally required. Voluntary commitments in this draft do not waive legal protections or expand an exemption. A claimed essential requirement, safety concern, cost or scope limitation must receive individualized review; staff may not apply a categorical denial. Legal standards for fundamental alteration, undue burden, effective communication and permissible documentation vary by governing law and must be confirmed before use.

3 Scope and Eligibility

3.1 Coverage

The proposed policy covers applicants and enrolled Stewards/Students in all five Schools, orientation, classes, approved learning activities, assessments, support consultations, virtual and any future physical delivery, and Institute personnel implementing support. Universal offers begin in admissions and orientation; students may request individualized support during enrollment or at any later time.

3.2 Eligibility

A student may identify a barrier involving reading, writing, communication, hearing, vision, processing, attention, mobility, episodic health, technology access or scheduling. Ordinary Institute learning support does not automatically require a diagnosis, prior IEP or Section 504 plan. Financial, language, caregiving and technology barriers may justify educational assistance without establishing legal disability status. Disability-related legal eligibility is a separate determination when necessary.

3.3 Additional review

Minors, public-agency placements, funded programs, incarcerated learners, out-of-state participants, practicum activities and future physical facilities require additional legal and operational assessment. Intake shall collect only the age category and location necessary for that review, rather than unnecessary identity or clinical information. The Institute shall not promise specialized services beyond its verified authority and capacity.

4 Definitions and Terminology

4.1 Defined terms

Steward/Student: an applicant or enrolled learner covered by this policy; the term conveys educational participation, not a spiritual rank.

Universal Learning Support: broadly available design and instructional assistance offered to all learners without individualized eligibility screening.

Individualized Steward Support Plan or ISSP: a confidential internal written record of authorized, student-specific educational adjustments, responsibilities, dates and reviews. It has no independent statutory IEP or Section 504 status.

Educational Accommodation: an individualized adjustment to access, instruction, communication, participation or assessment intended to address a barrier, subject to applicable law and authorized academic standards.

Learning Barrier: a condition or feature of an educational activity that limits meaningful participation or demonstration of learning; it does not necessarily establish a disability.

Essential Academic Requirement: a competency or requirement demonstrated through documented academic reasoning to be integral to the approved educational objective, rather than merely customary delivery.

Accessible Instructional Materials: materials usable through appropriate formats, reading order, readable presentation and compatible assistive methods for the intended learner.

Support Coordinator: the formally designated person responsible for intake, consultation, plan coordination, monitoring and escalation within delegated authority.

Support Consultation: a private, interactive discussion of barriers, student perspectives, educational requirements and support options.

Confidential Student Support Record: restricted records of requests, consultations, supporting information, determinations, plans, disclosures and reviews.

Reconsideration: a documented request to review a support determination, new information or changed circumstances.

Grievance: a documented concern about access, delay, implementation, privacy, retaliation or procedural fairness routed through the authorized complaint process.

4.2 Administrative terms

Business day: Monday through Friday excluding published Institute closures and holidays, using the Institute’s Central Time calendar. This definition is proposed and must be approved before publication. Receipt time, closure calendar and any adjustment shall be recorded. A target is an internal service goal, not a statutory deadline.

Authorized decision-maker: a person with a documented delegation or governance power covering the particular decision. Student acknowledgment confirms receipt and participation; it does not waive rights or authorize unrestricted disclosure.

5 Institutional Policy Statements

5.1 Access and individualized review

The Institute shall offer universal support to every Steward/Student and review individualized requests without requiring special terminology or a particular form. Staff shall not equate a support request with misconduct, poor effort or inability to succeed. Student preference shall inform evaluation; an effective alternative may be considered with reasons documented.

5.2 Educational integrity

Support shall preserve essential competencies subject to applicable law. The Institute shall assess whether a delivery method is essential before refusing an adjustment. A support plan does not itself alter curriculum, lower the default mastery threshold, guarantee a grade or authorize prohibited assessment assistance.

5.3 Non-retaliation and consistency

Retaliation for a good-faith request, report, disagreement or participation in review is prohibited as an institutional commitment consistent with the reviewed Student Policy Manual. Similar cases shall use the same evaluation process while permitting justified individual differences. Staff shall document material reasons for different outcomes.

5.4 Confidentiality and costs

Information shall be collected and shared only for necessary educational, administrative, safety or legal purposes. Approved support shall not be conditioned on promotional consent. This draft proposes no accommodation surcharge to the student; institutional funding and any applicable legal prohibitions on surcharges require confirmation before adoption.

6 Student Rights and Responsibilities

6.1 Proposed student protections

Stewards/Students shall receive accessible information about requesting support, meaningful participation in planning, respectful consultation, a written determination or status update, a copy of their ISSP and an accessible review pathway. They may decline the voluntary Learning Profile, request amendments, identify ineffective support and raise good-faith concerns without retaliation. These are proposed institutional protections, not an assertion that every statutory student right applies.

6.2 Participation and responsibilities

Students shall describe the barrier as they are reasonably able, participate in discussion, identify upcoming deadlines, provide limited information reasonably needed for review, follow authorized arrangements and report implementation problems promptly. Staff shall assist students who cannot independently complete forms. Late requests remain reviewable; urgency changes triage, not eligibility by itself.

6.3 Academic and privacy expectations

Students remain responsible for their own learning, honesty, required competencies and agreed communication. They need not disclose a diagnosis to instructors. Records access or correction requests go to authorized records personnel, subject to identity verification, third-party privacy and applicable law. Guardian participation and access shall be determined from age, enrollment classification, authority and applicable law; neither automatic parental access nor automatic exclusion is presumed.

7 Administrative Roles and Responsibilities

7.1 Governance authority

The Institute Director is proposed to oversee staffing, resources, escalations and implementation within verified delegation. The Founder’s current interim authority and any later governing committee powers control adoption and reserved decisions. A materially conflicted official shall not decide their own complaint or appeal. A conflict-free authorized reviewer must be assigned before rollout.

7.2 Support Coordinator

The Coordinator shall maintain intake and target logs; arrange accessible consultations; evaluate barriers; coordinate limited documentation; prepare reasoned recommendations; issue determinations within delegation; maintain plans and restricted records; monitor implementation; and escalate delays, disputes, privacy events and capacity needs. The Coordinator shall not diagnose, promise unavailable clinical services or independently change essential academic requirements.

7.3 School administrators and instructors

School administrators shall confirm learning objectives, designate assessment implementers, arrange staff coverage and validate competency-equivalent alternatives. Instructors shall offer universal supports, route verbal or written requests, implement authorized adjustments, confirm receipt of F05, keep factual attendance and assessment records, and report problems. An instructor may raise an academic concern promptly but shall not unilaterally cancel a plan.

7.4 Records personnel and students

Authorized records personnel shall administer role-based access, secure transmission, disclosure logs, retention controls, holds and incident response. Students contribute their experience, review plan details and report effectiveness. Role names, contact methods, alternates, delegations and resources shall be completed in the roadmap decision register before adoption.

8 Accommodation Request and Determination Procedures

8.1 Receiving a request

Any instructor or approved administrative contact receiving a verbal or written request shall record its original receipt date, essential barrier information, preferred contact method and upcoming time-sensitive activity. The recipient shall privately refer it to the Coordinator by the next business day under the proposed SOP. F02 is optional as a submission method; staff may complete it from the student’s words and confirm accuracy.

8.2 Service targets

The Institute proposes acknowledgment within two business days of receipt; an initial consultation within five business days when reasonably practicable; and a written determination or documented status update within seven to ten business days after necessary information has been received. These are internal service targets, not statutory legal deadlines. Acknowledgment and consultation shall not wait for a completed form or medical record.

8.3 Incomplete information

The Coordinator shall identify precisely what information is missing, why it is needed and accessible ways to supply it. Existing records, student explanation, prior supports, observation and limited functional information shall be considered before requesting additional professional evidence. A prior IEP, Section 504 plan or diagnosis is not an automatic prerequisite for ordinary support. For requests requiring legal disability verification, documentation must be relevant and proportionate under the applicable standard. No full medical file shall be routinely required.

8.4 Status and individualized evaluation

The record shall identify when sufficient information became available and the basis for that judgment. An incomplete file shall receive a status contact at least every five business days while active, with student-agreed next steps; no request may be silently shelved. Evaluate the barrier, requested support, course requirements, effective alternatives, student preference, implementation resources and any law-specific standard. Record consultation and objective academic reasoning in F04.

8.5 Decisions and urgent matters

Outcomes are approved, approved with an effective alternative, more information needed, or not approved with reasons and review information. An authorized official shall document the decision, scope, start date, responsible staff and follow-up. Before denying for essential requirement, cost, safety or scope, obtain academic review and legal escalation as appropriate. For an imminent class or assessment, seek authorized interim support as soon as practicable, normally the same or next business day; do not delay solely to meet an ordinary queue. Document interim authority and expiry. Emergencies follow current safety procedures.

8.6 Delay and communication

If a target cannot be met, the Coordinator shall explain the reason, interim options, next action and revised date before the target expires where practicable, escalating to the Director or verified delegate. Further updates shall occur at least every five business days. Provide the determination privately in an accessible format and explain reconsideration. All numerical targets remain proposed until reconciled and adopted.

9 Individualized Steward Support Plan Requirements

9.1 Mandatory plan content

Every ISSP shall identify the student and restricted case number; School and course; functional barriers without unnecessary diagnostic detail; relevant competencies; approved adjustments and precise parameters; responsible implementers; approved communication methods; assessment and attendance arrangements; start, review and anticipated end dates; monitoring measures; contingency steps; decision authority; student acknowledgment; version history; and review/grievance instructions. F03 is the controlled plan template.

9.2 Approval and release

The Coordinator prepares the plan; the academic lead validates competency and assessment issues; the delegated decision-maker authorizes it. The student receives and may correct implementation details. A missing acknowledgment does not automatically defeat a legally required or already authorized adjustment; document attempted communication and resolve disputed terms. Send only the implementation summary F05 to relevant instructors and confirm readiness.

9.3 Monitoring and amendment

Review initial effectiveness within two instructional weeks of implementation, at least once every four instructional weeks thereafter, before major assessments and whenever a material barrier or course change occurs. These are proposed internal intervals. Amendments require a dated version, reason, authority, student notice, affected-instructor notice and effective date. Preserve prior versions and avoid gaps in authorized support.

9.4 School transition and closure

Before movement to another School, review the new course demands with the student and receiving academic lead. Transfer only the minimum information needed; do not require a new diagnosis merely because the School changes. Existing adjustments are reassessed for the new setting rather than assumed identical or automatically cancelled. On completion, withdrawal, student-requested discontinuation or replacement, document closure and unresolved issues in F06, explain reactivation and place records under the approved retention controls. Nonresponse alone requires documented outreach and authority review before closure.

10 Assessment and Academic Standards

10.1 Assessment types

Standard assessment uses the approved course method without individual adjustment. Supported assessment retains the intended competency and method with adjustments such as additional time, accessible format, breaks or a separate virtual session. Alternative assessment uses a different method, such as an oral explanation in place of a written response, only when it measures equivalent approved competencies and is authorized.

10.2 Competency and fairness review

The School academic lead shall identify what the task measures, distinguish knowledge from incidental reading speed or presentation demands, and document whether the proposed method validly measures the objective. If recitation, pronunciation, writing or another specific skill is itself essential, an alternative must measure that skill or follow separately authorized curriculum review. The default 80% mastery target remains unless changed through proper academic authority. The ISSP does not independently lower it.

10.3 School 1 assessments

For the Week 7 midterm and Week 16 final, review arrangements at least two instructional weeks beforehand where practicable. Confirm exact dates through the authorized calendar; do not derive examination dates solely from November 19. Record time allowance, break rules, format, platform, proctoring, permitted aids, rubric, make-up method and a backup for technology failure. Late or newly arising requests remain eligible for urgent review.

10.4 Examples and integrity

Hypothetical example: a learner with a processing barrier may receive segmented directions and an agreed additional time allowance while answering the same foundational knowledge questions. A learner who can explain a concept orally may use an approved oral assessment if written expression is incidental to the objective. These are examples, not approved individual arrangements. Read-aloud help shall not supply answers; proctors and assistive tools must follow documented boundaries. Class recordings, interpreters and any AI tools require specific privacy and integrity review.

10.5 Attendance and remedial action

Following an approved modified schedule shall not create an attendance penalty, consistent with the Student Policy Manual and Decision TAI-2026-006. Keep the factual attendance history and authorized accommodation status. Support does not automatically excuse essential learning or erase missed work. If approved support fails during assessment, preserve relevant evidence, contact the Coordinator promptly, and consider a supervised make-up or other authorized remedy before finalizing a disputed outcome.

11 Confidentiality and Records Management

11.1 Collection and separation

Collect functional barrier information and support needs rather than routine diagnoses, medication lists or detailed clinical histories. Store request and consultation records separately from broadly accessible attendance, classroom and assignment records. Use a restricted case identifier in logs. F05 contains only implementation information; instructors do not receive F04 or medical attachments as a routine matter.

11.2 Access and technology

The records lead shall approve named access roles, least-privilege permissions, multifactor authentication where available, secured devices, access review and secure backups. The Coordinator and specifically authorized reviewers may access detailed case records; instructors receive only required adjustments. Zoom, BAND, email and general cloud folders are not automatically approved confidential-record channels. The institution must verify vendor terms, permissions, retention, recording, AI processing, export and incident controls before transmitting support information.

11.3 Transmission and disclosure

Use authenticated restricted links or an approved secure transfer method; confirm the intended recipient and avoid sensitive subject lines or group messages. Record the recipient, purpose, scope, date and legal or institutional basis for material disclosures. Obtain specific consent when required. Guardian, provider and external-agency sharing requires verified authority and appropriate legal review. Safety or legal duties may require disclosure; absolute confidentiality shall not be promised.

11.4 Retention access and deletion

No numerical student-support retention period is approved in this draft. Before launch of the new records workflow, counsel and the records lead shall approve a schedule for intake, plans, clinical attachments, instructor summaries, grievances, backups and access logs, including minors, holds and applicable access rights. Pending that decision, restrict and minimize records under existing authorized controls and prohibit ad hoc destruction; resolve the schedule promptly rather than defaulting to indefinite retention. Do not destroy records subject to a hold, unresolved access request or active review. Authorize, log and securely execute deletion and archive access under the approved schedule.

11.5 Incident response

Report suspected misdirection, unauthorized access or disclosure immediately to the designated records/privacy lead and Director or verified alternate. Contain exposure without destroying evidence, preserve an access-restricted incident record, involve counsel for notice duties and document corrective action. Statutory notification clocks, if applicable, are distinct from support service targets. Any breach notice or legal disclosure must follow current law rather than an invented Institute deadline.

12 Grievances Appeals and Reconsideration

12.1 Accessible entry and triage

A student may verbally or in writing request reconsideration of a determination or file a grievance concerning delay, nonimplementation, privacy, retaliation or process. Informal discussion is optional and not a prerequisite to a formal complaint. Staff shall preserve the original submission date when rerouting. Urgent access barriers receive interim review; safety, abuse or serious misconduct follows existing conduct and safeguarding procedures without delaying required external reporting.

12.2 Reconsideration

The student may identify disputed facts, new information, changed needs, procedural errors or desired relief. The Coordinator records the request and forwards it to a conflict-free authorized reviewer who did not make the challenged decision. Proposed acknowledgment is two business days and written outcome or status is seven business days after sufficient information. This seven-day review target is distinct from the initial seven-to-ten-day determination target. No fixed filing cutoff is imposed by this new draft.

12.3 Grievance and final review

Use the controlling complaint process in Student Policy Manual § 7 and Master Blueprint Part XIII. This proposal adds an access-specific intake and record structure; it does not silently replace an existing grievance policy. Pending reconciliation, proposed formal stages are acknowledgment within two business days; a reasoned written outcome or status within ten business days after sufficient information; and an opportunity to seek final review within ten business days of outcome receipt, with late requests considered for good cause. These supplemental timings require governance approval. Final review shall be decided by the Founder under verified interim authority or the authorized governance body, with recusal and an independent authorized reviewer for conflicts.

12.4 Written outcome and remedies

Provide the issue, relevant standard, material facts, rationale, corrective steps, responsible role, dates and any remaining internal review opportunity. Permit an accessible opportunity to respond and protect third-party information. Potential remedies include correcting implementation, amending the plan, arranging a fair reassessment, correcting an attendance classification or improving staff procedures. Filing does not automatically suspend every academic action; the reviewer shall assess interim protections. Internal review shall not restrict any available external legal complaint route or deadline.

13 Monitoring Evaluation and Quality Assurance

13.1 Case monitoring

The Coordinator shall check instructor receipt before implementation and document initial, four-week and assessment reviews in F06. Ask whether access improved, whether adjustments were actually delivered and whether revision is needed; avoid collecting new clinical information merely to confirm a support is working. Escalate missed arrangements and overdue targets to the designated supervisor.

13.2 Program assurance

Each term, Student Support Services shall review response times, implementation failures, plan transitions, grievance themes, accessibility defects and resource needs using de-identified counts. Small cohorts require suppression of combinations that could identify students. Do not publish diagnostic categories or identifiable case histories. Assign corrective actions with owners and due dates and report completion to the verified governance authority.

13.3 Policy review

Review the framework annually after adoption and earlier after material legal, program, funding, technology or governance changes. The next formal review date remains unset until adoption. Staff training and document accessibility checks shall be refreshed when procedures or systems change.

14 Related Institutional Policies

14.1 Reviewed institutional records

The drafting review examined Master Blueprint Version 3.0, the Official Decision Register through TAI-2026-008, Official Student Policy Manual Version 1.0, Student Handbook Version 2.0, School 1 Master Blueprint Version 1.0, the September 16 legacy final Handbook and the Student Support, Rights and Separation Policy Packet marked Committee Review Draft. Their self-described authority and retrieved contents are recorded in ABAS-ISSP-CROSSWALK-001; independent validation of all adoption instruments remains pending.

14.2 Records still needed

The standalone Steward Agreement and Attendance Guidelines & Agreement Version 1.0, stated effective September 16, 2026, were not separately located. Their titles and stated date are user-provided, not independently verified. Obtain the current executed or controlled versions, grievance/complaint procedures, safety rules, records schedule and approved calendar before final reconciliation. No existing adopted record was modified by this project.

14.3 Hierarchy

Within this support framework, Level 1 is ABAS-ISSP-001; Level 2 is ABAS-ISSP-SOP-001; Level 3 is F01–F06. This local hierarchy sits within, and does not displace, the Institute-wide hierarchy in Master Blueprint Part VII and TAI-2026-004. Where a conflict appears, preserve applicable legal obligations, escalate to authorized governance and document an approved resolution before relying on a changed rule.

15 Legal References and Compliance Review

15.1 Legal reference register

The governing topics for review are ADA Titles II and III and implementing regulations; Section 504 and applicable funding-agency regulations; IDEA where educational classification and placement make it relevant; FERPA; Texas Human Resources Code Chapter 121; Texas Business and Commerce Code Chapters 521 and 541; applicable child-data and other-state requirements. Sources L01–L14 in the separate legal matrix identify primary law and official guidance, potential coverage and required facts.

15.2 Verification controls

The compliance matrix shall track requirement, source, jurisdiction, potential applicability, needed facts, reviewer, status and action. At present all Institute-specific legal applicability and attorney sign-off remain pending. The Director or verified sponsor shall obtain formation and control records, funding agreements, program descriptions, student age/location categories, staffing counts, vendor arrangements and the current governance charter. Counsel shall document actual applicability and required revisions before approval.

15.3 Standards versus obligations

University examples B01–B04 inform document governance, consultation, limited instructor letters and fair review. They do not confer accreditation or import those universities’ legal status, documentation thresholds or retention periods. WCAG 2.2 is a recommended digital design target; counsel must identify any legally mandated technical standard for each program. All proposed commitments remain subject to adoption controls.

16 Approval Implementation and Revision History

16.1 Mandatory adoption gate

This policy remains nonoperative as a formally adopted institutional policy until the Institute completes applicable federal-law review; applicable state-law review; organizational and religious-entity classification review; funding and program applicability assessment; qualified legal counsel review; reconciliation with existing Institute policies; documentation of necessary revisions; formal approval by the authorized decision-maker; and assignment of a controlled final version and effective date. An AI-generated matrix is not attorney review.

16.2 Implementation control

Approval shall identify the legal-review evidence, adopted version, authority, effective date, owner, staff delegations, records and technology controls, training completion and communication plan. Record material decisions in the Decision Register. Archive this working draft without portraying its preparation date as an effective date. The SOP and forms may become operative only within the adopted policy and verified delegations.

16.3 Revision history

Version 0.1: prior working draft referenced by the user; original and edits unavailable for comparison. Version 0.2, prepared October 27, 2026: provisional university-style reconstruction preserving the user-supplied foundational requirements, adding legal verification, governance controls, SOP and six forms. Proposed changes from retrieved legacy materials are listed in the crosswalk; no legal approval or adoption has occurred.

Research references

Primary and institutional sources accessed October 27, 2026. Research supports drafting only; qualified counsel must verify current law before adoption. Source identifiers match ABAS-ISSP-LEGAL-001.

[L01] U.S. Department of Justice. ADA Title III Technical Assistance Manual, III-1.5000 religious entities. Open source L01

[L02] Office of the Federal Register. 28 CFR Part 36, including §§ 36.102(e), 36.301, 36.302 and 36.303. Open source L02

[L03] Office of the Federal Register. 34 CFR Part 104, including §§ 104.3, 104.7–104.9, 104.39 and 104.44. Open source L03

[L04] U.S. Department of Education. Transition of Students With Disabilities To Postsecondary Education. Open source L04

[L05] Office of the Federal Register. 34 CFR § 300.137 and associated §§ 300.130–300.144. Open source L05

[L07] U.S. Department of Education. To which educational agencies or institutions does FERPA apply. Open source L07

[L08] Office of the Federal Register. 34 CFR Part 99, including §§ 99.1, 99.5, 99.10, 99.20 and 99.30–99.36. Open source L08

[L09] Texas Legislature. Human Resources Code Chapter 121, §§ 121.002–121.004 and 121.010. Open source L09

[L10] Texas Legislature. Business and Commerce Code Chapter 521, §§ 521.002, 521.052 and 521.053. Open source L10

[L11] Texas Legislature. Business and Commerce Code Chapter 541, §§ 541.001–541.003. Open source L11

[B01] University of Texas at Austin. Policy Process. Open source B01

[B02] University of Texas at Austin Disability and Access. Policies and Procedures. Open source B02

[B03] Stanford University Office of Accessible Education. Register with the OAE. Open source B03

[B04] Stanford University Bulletin. ADA and Section 504 Grievance Procedure. Open source B04

[B05] World Wide Web Consortium. Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 2.2, Recommendation December 12, 2024. Open source B05