California OAH special education order · July 9, 2013
Second Order for Supplemental Briefing on Student's Last Agreed and Implemented Placement
OAH Case No. 2013060923 · ALJ Margaret Broussard
OAH ordered the District to file the IEP it considers Student's last agreed and implemented IEP, because neither side had clearly established the stay put placement.
Summary
Student moved for stay put. OAH had already ordered Student to produce a signed copy of the last implemented IEP showing consent. Student responded on time but could not provide a clear signed copy. The District opposed the motion but did not address which IEP was last agreed and implemented, so OAH ordered it to file that IEP by July 11, 2013, and to respond to Student's claim that stay put is Glenholme School under the December 2012 IEP.
Why it matters
Stay put turns on the last agreed and implemented IEP, so both sides should file a clear, signed copy showing consent. A district opposition that skips this question may lead OAH to demand more briefing.
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. 2013060923
v. SECOND ORDER FOR
SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEFING ON
LOS ANGELES UNIFIED SCHOOL STUDENT’S LAST AGREED AND
DISTRICT. IMPLEMENTED PLACEMENT
On June 27, 2013, the undersigned ALJ issued an order for supplemental briefing regarding Student’s stay put motion. Student was ordered to produce a signed copy of the last implemented IEP showing consent. Student responded to the order for supplemental briefing in a timely matter. However, Student did not have a clear copy of the last signed IEP showing consent. Although the District sent an opposition to Student’s stay put motion, it did not address the issue of the last agreed and implemented IEP placement.
ORDER
The District is ordered to file a copy of the IEP it regards as Student’s last agreed upon and implemented IEP and to respond to Student’s contention that Student’s last agreed and implemented placement is Glenholme School pursuant to the December 2012 IEP. The District is ordered to respond on this issue only by July 11, 2013.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: July 09, 2013 /s/
MARGARET BROUSSARD
Administrative Law Judge Office of Administrative Hearings