California OAH special education order · May 9, 2014

Order for Supplemental Briefing on Motion for Stay Put

OAH Case No. 2014050320 · ALJ Peter Paul Castillo

OAH held off ruling on Student's stay put motion against Elk Grove and ordered both sides to brief whether Student moved out of Sacramento City Unified before the April 25, 2014 IEP.

Ruling Stay put

Summary

Student asked OAH to order Elk Grove to implement the last agreed upon and implemented program developed by Student's prior district, Sacramento City Unified. Elk Grove opposed. It argued the motion was premature because Parents had not let Elk Grove develop and offer a comparable program. OAH did not rule yet. It ordered each party, within five days, to file briefing and sworn declarations on whether Student moved out of Sacramento's boundaries before April 25, 2014, and how that affects whether the April 25, 2014 IEP is Student's stay put program.

Why it matters

When a family moves between districts, the timing of the move compared with the date of the last IEP can decide which program counts as stay put. Families should be ready to prove that timing with sworn declarations.

Topics

stay put interdistrict transfer comparable services supplemental briefing last agreed upon iep

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:

PARENTS ON BEHALF OF STUDENT, OAH Case No. 2014050320 v. ORDER FOR SUPPLEMENTAL

BRIEFING ON MOTION FOR STAY

ELK GROVE UNIFIED SCHOOL PUT

DISTRICT.

On May 5, 2014, Student filed a motion for stay put, asserting that Elk Grove Unified School District is refusing to implement Student’s last agreed upon and implemented educational program developed by Student’s prior school district, Sacramento City Unified School District. On May 8, 2014, Elk Grove filed an opposition to the motion, asserting that the motion is premature as Parents have not permitted Elk Grove to develop and offer a comparable educational program. Additional information is required before a ruling may be made on the pleadings.

ORDER

Within five days of this order, each party shall provide the following information and briefing regarding:

1. Did Student move out of the boundaries of Sacramento prior to April 25,

2014?

2. If Student did move out of the boundaries of the Sacramento prior to April 25,

2014, what effect did this have, if any, on whether the April 25, 2014 IEP is Student’s last agreed upon and implemented educational program? Each party shall include sworn declarations supporting any factual assertions included in its briefing.