California OAH special education order · April 19, 2013
Order of Determination of Sufficiency of Due Process Complaint
OAH Case No. 2013040364 · ALJ Robert Helfand
OAH found District's complaint sufficient because it clearly stated one issue: whether District may finish Student's triennial assessment without Parents requiring that they be allowed to observe standardized testing.
This case went to decision
Student v. West Contra Costa Unified School District (consolidated): West Contra Costa Unified wins every issue; parents must allow triennial testing without the mother observing. (2013)
Summary
District filed a due process complaint asking OAH to let it complete Student's triennial psychoeducational and behavior assessments without conditions set by Parents. Student filed a notice of insufficiency along with a motion to dismiss, and this order addresses only the notice of insufficiency. OAH found the complaint sufficient because it clearly identified the single issue, whether Parents can require that they observe the administration of standardized testing, and gave enough facts for Student to respond and take part in mediation. All mediation, prehearing conference, and hearing dates were confirmed.
Why it matters
A district complaint seeking to assess over parental conditions only needs to state the issue and basic facts clearly to go forward. Parents who want to challenge it will usually need arguments on the merits, such as whether a parent may observe testing, rather than a sufficiency challenge.
Key authority cited
- 20 U.S.C. § 1415(b)(7)(A)
- Ed. Code § 56502
- Sen. Rep. No. 108-185
- Escambia County Board of Educ. v. Benton (S.D.Ala. 2005) 406 F.Supp.2d 1248
- 71 Fed.Reg. 46540-46541, 46699
Topics
Full text of the order
Published text of the OAH order. Page headers and numbers from the original PDF have been dropped.
BEFORE THE
OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
In the Matter of:
WEST CONTRA COSTA UNIFIED OAH CASE NO. 2013040364
SCHOOL DISTRICT,
ORDER OF DETERMINATION OF
v. SUFFICIENCY OF DUE PROCESS
COMPLAINT
PARENTS ON BEHALF OF STUDENT.
On April 08, 2013 the West Contra Costa Unified School District (District) filed a Due Process Hearing Request 1 (complaint) naming Parents on behalf of Student (Student) as respondents. The complaint seeks an order permitting it to complete its triennial psychoeducation and behavior assessments without parental restrictions or conditions.
On April 18, 2013, Student filed a Response to the complaint including a Notice of Insufficiency (NOI), and a motion to dismiss as to District’s complaint. This order will only address Student’s NOI.
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 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).
requirements prevent vague and confusing complaints, and promote fairness by providing the 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
The facts alleged in the District’s complaint are sufficient to put the Student on notice of the issues forming the basis of the complaint. The District’s complaint clearly identifies the single issue and adequate related facts about the problem to permit Student to respond to the complaint and participate in mediation. Here, the sole issue alleged is whether the District may complete its ongoing triennial assessment without Student’s parents imposing conditions on the assessor to permit parental observation of the administration of standardized testing.
Therefore, District’s complaint is sufficient.
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).
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 19, 2013 /s/
ROBERT HELFAND
Administrative Law Judge Office of Administrative Hearings