California OAH special education order · June 12, 2013
Final Order Denying Notice of Insufficiency
OAH Case No. 2013060160 · ALJ Adrienne L. Krikorian
OAH found Student's complaint sufficient because its facts about failing grades, unmet and repeated 5th-grade-level IEP goals, and inadequate services gave District notice of a single FAPE claim.
Summary
District challenged the sufficiency of a due process complaint that Student's mother filed. The complaint said Student was failing or near-failing his classes, had met only two IEP goals, had 5th-grade-level goals that were repeated and did not consider a high school diploma, and lacked evidence-based interventions. It asked for intensive academic instruction. OAH read the facts together with the requested remedy and found they stated one clear issue: whether District denied Student a FAPE by failing to provide appropriate academic supports and services for meaningful progress. The complaint was found sufficient and all scheduled dates were confirmed.
Why it matters
A parent's complaint can survive a sufficiency challenge if it gives plain facts about the student's lack of progress and IEP problems plus a requested remedy. OAH reads complaints liberally and may combine the facts and the requested remedy to frame the issue.
Key authority cited
- 20 U.S.C. § 1415(b)(7)(A)
- Ed. Code § 56502
- Sen. Rep. No. 108-185 (2003)
- Escambia County Board of Educ. v. Benton (S.D.Ala. 2005) 406 F.Supp.2d 1248
- Alexandra R. v. Brookline School Dist. (D.N.H. 2009) 2009 WL 2957991
- 71 Fed.Reg. 46540-46541, 46699 (Aug. 14, 2006)
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:
PARENT ON BEHALF OF STUDENT, OAH CASE NO. 2013060160
v. FINAL ORDER DENYING NOTICE OF
INSUFFICIENCY
SWEETWATER UNION HIGH SCHOOL
DISTRICT.
On May 31, 2013, Student’s mother (Parent) filed a Due Process Hearing Request 1 (complaint) on Student’s behalf naming Sweetwater Union High School District (District).
District timely filed a Notice of Sufficiency on June 12, 2013. For the reasons discussed below, the NOI is denied.
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 14 years old, attends Bonita Vista Middle School, and that his district of residence is Sweetwater Union High School District. He also alleges that: he has an individualized education plan (IEP); he is failing or getting borderline grades in all of his academic subjects; he met only two goals on his IEP; his IEP goals are 5th grade goals without consideration to the possibility of him obtaining a high school diploma; services offered to Student on his IEP are not appropriate because they fail to address his academic gap; the IEP does not provide evidenced-based interventions; and the IEP repeats unmet goals. Student contends he is not making academic progress. He seeks as a proposed resolution intensive academic instruction for one hour three times a week for six months.
Student’s complaint states sufficient facts to put District on notice of the single issue forming the basis of the complaint. When the facts are read in conjunction with the proposed resolution, the only claim stated in the complaint is whether District denied Student a FAPE during the applicable statutory period by failing to provide him with appropriate academic supports and related services designed to help him make meaningful academic progress.
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).
Student’s complaint identifies the issue and adequate related facts about the problem to permit District to respond to the complaint and participate in a resolution session and mediation. Therefore, Student’s complaint is sufficient.
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: June 12, 2013 /s/
ADRIENNE L. KRIKORIAN
Administrative Law Judge Office of Administrative Hearings