California OAH special education order · June 4, 2014
Order of Determination of Sufficiency of Due Process Complaint
OAH Case No. 2014050882 · ALJ Susan Ruff
OAH found Student's complaint against Potter Valley sufficient, ruling that all four issues and the proposed resolutions gave the district enough notice, even though the general education-program claim could be pled more specifically.
Summary
Potter Valley filed a notice of insufficiency challenging Student's four-issue due process complaint and its requested resolutions. The ALJ found that the issues on assessments, the individual transition plan, and records production clearly put the district on notice. The ALJ also found the broader claim that the district failed to provide an adequate education program was sufficient, because its supporting facts pointed to specialized academic instruction, transition services, behavior intervention, and counseling. Student's proposed resolutions met the standard of being stated to the extent known, so all scheduled dates were confirmed.
Why it matters
OAH reads complaints liberally. A broadly worded issue can survive a sufficiency challenge if the facts alleged explain what services were missing, and any remaining ambiguity can be clarified at the prehearing conference.
Key authority cited
- 20 U.S.C. § 1415(b)(7)(A)
- 20 U.S.C. § 1415(c)
- Ed. Code § 56502
- 71 Fed.Reg. 46540-46541, 46699
- 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
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:
STUDENT, OAH CASE NO. 2014050882
v. ORDER OF DETERMINATION OF
SUFFICIENCY OF DUE PROCESS
POTTER VALLEY COMMUNITY COMPLAINT
UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT.
On May 19, 2014, Student filed a due process hearing request 1 (complaint) naming the Potter Valley Community Unified School District (Potter Valley).
On June 3, 2014, Potter Valley filed a 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 alleges four issues in the complaint. Three of the issues – issue one (failure by Potter Valley to perform complete and proper assessments of Student), issue three (failure to prepare an appropriate individual transition plan), and issue four (failure to produce complete Student records) – are sufficient to put Potter Valley on notice as to the basis of the complaint, and are sufficient to permit Potter Valley to participate in a resolution session and mediation.
Issue two (failure to provide an adequate education program) is a bit more problematic, because it is stated more generally, but the facts alleged as part of that issue clarify that it is based on an alleged failure to provide sufficient specialized academic instruction, transition services, behavior intervention and counseling. While that issue could be more specifically pled, it is sufficient for purposes of an NOI. Any ambiguities can be clarified during the prehearing conference.
Potter Valley also challenges the resolutions requested in the complaint. A complaint is required to include proposed resolutions to the problem, to the extent known and available 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).
to the party at the time. (20 U.S.C. §1415(b)(7)(A)(ii)(IV).) 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.
DATE: June 4, 2014
/S/
SUSAN RUFF
Administrative Law Judge Office of Administrative Hearings