California OAH special education order · December 19, 2014
Order of Determination of Sufficiency of Due Process Complaint
OAH Case No. 2014120642 · ALJ Kara Hatfield
OAH found Student's complaint sufficient, ruling that its claims about an unimplemented IEP and missed annual IEP reviews after private placement gave District enough notice to respond.
Summary
District filed a Notice of Insufficiency challenging Student's complaint. The complaint alleged District failed to implement Student's October 2012 IEP, failed to hold annual IEP reviews after Parents privately placed Student in December 2012, and failed to tell Parents about the continuum of service options. Student sought reimbursement for nonpublic school tuition, mileage, and an educational consultant. OAH found the complaint described the issues, related facts, and proposed resolutions clearly enough for District to respond and take part in a resolution session and mediation, so it was sufficient.
Why it matters
A complaint that names the IEP at issue, gives key dates, and lists specific reimbursement requests will usually survive a sufficiency challenge, because OAH reads pleadings liberally. Parents who privately place a child can still claim the district had to keep holding annual IEP reviews and making offers.
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. 2014120642
v. ORDER OF DETERMINATION OF
SUFFICIENCY OF DUE PROCESS
POWAY UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT. COMPLAINT
On December 8, 2014, Student filed a Due Process Hearing Request 1 (complaint)
naming Poway Unified School District.
On December 18, 2014, District filed a timely 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 District denied Student a FAPE by failing to implement Student’s IEP dated October 24, 2012. Student alleges that Parents gave District notice of their intent to place Student in another program on November 15, 2012, and implemented that private placement on December 10, 2012. Student asserts that after that placement, District failed to hold required annual review IEP meetings and Student therefore did not have IEP’s or District offers of special education and related services for the 2013- 2014 and 2014-2015 school years. In addition, Student alleges that District did not inform Parents of the “continuum of service options” available to meet Student’s needs. Student’s requested remedies are reimbursement for tuition at the nonpublic school Student attended since December 10, 2012, for the 2012-2013, 2013-2014, and 2014-2015 school years, mileage reimbursement for transportation of Student to her nonpublic school since December 10, 2012, for the 2012-2013, 2013-2014, and 2014-2015 school years, and reimbursement for the cost of services provided by an educational consultant.
The facts alleged in Student’s complaint are sufficient to put District on notice of the issues forming the basis of the complaint. Student’s complaint identifies the issues and adequate related facts about the problem to permit District to respond to the complaint and 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).
participate in a resolution session and mediation. The complaint also contains adequate proposed resolutions. 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.
DATE: December 19, 2014
/S /
KARA HATFIELD
Administrative Law Judge Office of Administrative Hearings