California OAH special education order · October 20, 2015
Order Determining Complaint Sufficient
OAH Case No. 2015100305 · ALJ Marian H. Tully
OAH found Student's 23-page complaint sufficient because it described one math-related denial of FAPE claim in detail, with dates, people, IEPs, an independent evaluation, and proposed remedies.
Summary
District filed a Notice of Insufficiency challenging Student's complaint, which alleged District denied Student a free appropriate public education from October 2013 through October 2015 by failing to address Student's math needs. OAH found the complaint sufficient. It explained that the complaint gave detailed facts, dates, individuals involved, relevant IEPs and assessments, and an independent evaluator's findings. It also proposed resolutions, so District had enough notice to respond, take part in a resolution session and mediation, and prepare for hearing. All scheduled dates were confirmed.
Why it matters
A complaint that clearly states the issue, the time period, supporting facts, and specific requested remedies will survive a sufficiency challenge, because OAH reads pleading requirements liberally. Detailed descriptions of independent evaluation results strengthen a complaint.
Key authority cited
- 20 U.S.C. § 1415(b)(7)(A)(ii)
- Ed. Code § 56502
- Sen. Rep. No. 108-185
- Escambia County Board of Educ. v. Benton (S.D.Ala. 2005) 406 F.Supp.2d 1248
- 71 Fed.Reg. 46540-46541, 46699
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. 2015100305 v. ORDER DETERMINING COMPLAINT
SUFFICIENT
TORRANCE UNIFIED SCHOOL
DISTRICT.
On October 02, 2015, Parent on behalf of Student filed a Due Process Hearing Request 1 (complaint) naming Torrance Unified School District.
On October 16, 2015, District timely filed a Notice of Insufficiency as to Student’s complaint.
APPLICABLE LAW
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 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. 2 These requirements prevent vague and confusing complaints, and promote fairness by providing the named parties with sufficient information to know how to prepare for the hearing and how to participate in resolution sessions and mediation. 3 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)(7)(A)(ii)(III) & (IV).
3 See, H.R.Rep. No. 108-77, 1st Sess. (2003), p. 115; Sen. Rep. No. 108-185, 1st Sess. (2003), pp. 34-35.
The complaint provides enough information when it provides “an awareness and understanding of the issues forming the basis of the complaint.” 4 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. 5 Whether the complaint is sufficient is a matter within the sound discretion of the Administrative Law Judge. 6
DISCUSSION
The 23 page complaint states a single issue in substantial detail. The complaint alleges District denied Student a free appropriate public education from October 2, 2013 through October 2, 2015, by failing to address Student’s needs in the area of math. The complaint contains supporting factual allegations, specifies the dates of events, identifies the individuals involved, and describes the relevant individualized education programs, assessments, and documents. The complaint further identifies the individual that independently evaluated Student in the area of math, and describes her testing, the results of her evaluations and her conclusions.
The complaint contains proposed resolutions including reimbursement for the independent evaluator, intensive educational therapy to address Student’s deficits in math, compensatory education , and an order directing District to convene an IEP team meeting, pay Student’s independent evaluator to attend the IEP, and provide Student special education and related services that meet his unique needs in math.
The facts alleged in Student’s complaint are sufficient to put the 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 participate in a resolution session, mediation and prepare for hearing.
4 Sen. Rep. No. 108-185, supra, at p. 34.
5 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.].
6 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, 2015
/S /
MARIAN H. TULLY
Administrative Law Judge Office of Administrative Hearings