California OAH special education order · October 20, 2014
Order of Determination of Sufficiency of Due Process Complaint
OAH Case No. 2014100478 · ALJ Alexa J. Hohensee
OAH found Student's complaint sufficient despite very broad allegations, because it identified the placement and service-implementation problems, related facts, and a proposed resolution, giving District enough notice to respond.
Summary
District filed a notice of insufficiency challenging Student's due process complaint. The complaint alleged Student was placed in an inappropriate severe autism program, District delayed carrying out an IEP change to a mild/moderate autism program by two weeks, and Student then did not receive the aide, speech, behavior, and transportation services in his April 9, 2014 IEP. OAH ruled the complaint sufficient because, although broad, it identified the issues, related facts, and a proposed resolution (a full-time aide and compensatory education). All mediation, prehearing conference, and hearing dates were confirmed.
Why it matters
OAH reads complaints liberally. A parent's complaint that names the IEP, describes what was not provided, and asks for specific relief can survive a sufficiency challenge even if the allegations are broad.
Key authority cited
- 20 U.S.C. § 1415(b)(7)(A)
- 20 U.S.C. § 1415(c)
- Ed. Code § 56502
- Sen. Rep. No. 108-185
- 71 Fed.Reg. 46540-46541, 46699
- Escambia County Board of Educ. v. Benton (S.D.Ala. 2005) 406 F.Supp.2d 1248
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. 2014100478
v. ORDER OF DETERMINATION OF
SUFFICIENCY OF DUE PROCESS
LONG BEACH UNIFIED SCHOOL COMPLAINT
DISTRICT.
On October 9, 2014, Parent on behalf of Student filed a due process hearing request 1 (complaint) naming Long Beach Unified School District.
On October 14, 2014, District timely filed a notice of insufficiency 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’s complaint alleges that he was placed in an inappropriate program for students with severe autism last school year, and that District offered him a change of placement to a mild/moderate autism program at another school and services including a one-on-one aide, speech therapy, behavior support and transportation in his April 9, 2014 individualized education program. According to Student, District failed to implement the change in placement for two weeks, and after Student’s arrival in the new school, he failed to receive the services called for in his IEP. Student requests that his aide be made full time, and compensatory education for missed services and an inappropriate program. Although the allegations are very broad, the facts alleged in Student’s complaint are nonetheless sufficient to put the District on notice of the issues forming the basis of the complaint.
Student’s complaint identifies the issues, adequate related facts about the problem, and a proposed resolution to permit District to respond to the complaint and participate in a resolution session and mediation.
Therefore, Student’s statement of his claim 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.
DATE: October 20, 2014
/ S/
ALEXA J. HOHENSEE
Administrative Law Judge Office of Administrative Hearings