Order of Determination of Sufficiency of Due Process Complaint

BEFORE THE

OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

STATE OF CALIFORNIA

In the Matter of:

PARENT ON BEHALF OF STUDENT, OAH CASE NO. 2013030830

v. ORDER OF DETERMINATION OF

SUFFICIENCY OF DUE PROCESS

GROSSMONT UNION HIGH SCHOOL COMPLAINT

DISTRICT.

On March 20, 2013 Parent on behalf of Student filed a due process hearing request 1 (complaint) naming the Grossmont Union High School District (District).

On April 4, 2013, District filed a timely notice of insufficiency (NOI) as to Student’s complaint.

APPLICABLE LAW

The named parties to a due process hearing request have the right to challenge the sufficiency of the complaint. 2 The party filing the complaint is not entitled to a hearing unless the complaint meets the requirements of Title 20 United States Code section 1415(b)(7)(A).

A complaint is sufficient if it contains: (1) a description of the nature of the problem of the child relating to the proposed initiation or change concerning the identification, evaluation, or educational placement of the child, or the provision of a free appropriate public education (FAPE) to the child; (2) facts relating to the problem; and (3) a proposed resolution of the problem to the extent known and available to the party at the time. 3 These requirements prevent vague and confusing complaints, and promote fairness by providing the 1 A request for a due process hearing under Education Code section 56502 is the due process complaint notice required under Title 20 United States Code section 1415(b)(7)(A).

2 20 U.S.C. § 1415(b) & (c).

3 20 U.S.C. § 1415(b)(7)(A)(ii)(III) & (IV).

named parties with sufficient information to know how to prepare for the hearing and how to participate in resolution sessions and mediation. 4 The complaint provides enough information when it provides “an awareness and understanding of the issues forming the basis of the complaint.” 5 The pleading requirements should be liberally construed in light of the broad remedial purposes of the IDEA and the relative informality of the due process hearings it authorizes. 6 Whether the complaint is sufficient is a matter within the sound discretion of the Administrative Law Judge. 7

DISCUSSION

Student’s complaint alleges that he is 17 years old, in twelfth grade, and is eligible for special education under the category of emotional disturbance. Over the past two years, District has allegedly: failed to adequately assess Student; written individualized education programs (IEPs) did not have goals or sufficient services to address his emotional problems (including anxiety, internalization and low self-esteem), his lack of social skills or his attention problems; services were reduced and added to Student’s IEP arbitrarily; delayed in referring Student for a mental health assessment; and inappropriately placed Student.

Student’s complaint alleges that District’s failure to address his unique needs resulted in school avoidance behavior and failing grades, and ultimately required his parents to place him in a residential treatment facility. Student alleges two claims: (1) that District denied Student a FAPE by failing to assess him in all areas of suspected disability, failing to obtain accurate present levels of performance, failing to formulate appropriate goals, failing to provide appropriate services, and failing to appropriately place Student for the 2010-2011 school year, as well as (2) for the 2011-2012 and the 2012-2013 school years. As remedies, Student seeks compensatory education and reimbursement for private residential treatment.

4 See, H.R.Rep. No. 108-77, 1st Sess. (2003), p. 115; Sen. Rep. No. 108-185, 1st Sess. (2003), pp. 34-35.

5 Sen. Rep. No. 108-185, supra, at p. 34.

6 Alexandra R. v. Brookline School Dist. (D.N.H., Sept. 10, 2009, No. 06-cv-0215- JL) 2009 WL 2957991 at p.3 [nonpub. opn.]; Escambia County Board of Educ. v. Benton (S.D.Ala. 2005) 406 F. Supp.2d 1248, 1259-1260; Sammons v. Polk County School Bd.

(M.D. Fla., Oct. 28, 2005, No. 8:04CV2657T24EAJ) 2005 WL 2850076 at p. 3[nonpub.

opn.] ; but cf. M.S.-G. v. Lenape Regional High School Dist. (3d Cir. 2009) 306 Fed.Appx.

772, at p. 3[nonpub. opn.].

7 Assistance to States for the Education of Children With Disabilities and Preschool Grants for Children With Disabilities, 71 Fed.Reg. 46540-46541, 46699 (Aug. 14, 2006).

The facts alleged in Student’s complaint are sufficient to put the District on notice of the issues forming the basis of the complaint. Student’s complaint identifies the issues and adequate related facts concerning his increasing difficulty accessing the curriculum due to unaddressed emotional problems to permit District to respond to the complaint and participate in a resolution session and mediation. Therefore, Student’s statement of the two claims is sufficient.

A complaint is required to include proposed resolutions to the problem, to the extent known and available to the party at the time. (20 U.S.C. §1415(b)(7)(A)(ii)(IV).) The proposed resolutions stated in Student’s complaint, including compensatory education and reimbursement, are sufficiently well-defined. The nature and extent of compensatory education or reimbursement will be matters of proof at hearing. Therefore, Student has met the statutorily required standard of stating a resolution to the extent known and available to him at the time.

ORDER

1. The complaint is sufficient under Title 20 United States Code section

1415(b)(7)(A)(ii).

2. All mediation, prehearing conference, and hearing dates in this matter are

confirmed.

Dated: April 08, 2013 /s/

ALEXA J. HOHENSEE

Administrative Law Judge Office of Administrative Hearings