California OAH special education order · September 27, 2016
Order Determining Insufficiency of Issue Three of Due Process Complaint
OAH Case No. 2016090488 · ALJ Dena Coggins
OAH found Student's third claim, that Grossmont denied a FAPE by denying more vocational opportunities, insufficiently pled because it lacked facts about needed services, why they were needed, and when they should have been offered.
Summary
Grossmont filed a notice of insufficiency challenging only Issue Three of Student's complaint, which alleged the District denied a FAPE by denying more vocational opportunities. OAH found the claim described the nature of the problem but gave no facts about what vocational services or supports Student needed, why Student needed them to receive a FAPE, or when they should have been offered. Student was given 14 days to file an amended complaint. If Student does not amend in time, the hearing will go forward only on Issues 1 and 2.
Why it matters
A broad claim like 'denied more vocational opportunities' will not survive a sufficiency challenge unless it states the specific services needed, why they were needed, and the time period. Parents without a lawyer can ask OAH for a mediator's help in framing their issues before they amend.
Key authority cited
- 20 U.S.C. § 1415(b)(7)(A)
- 20 U.S.C. § 1415(c)(2)(D)
- 20 U.S.C. § 1415(c)(2)(E)(i)(II)
- Ed. Code, § 56505
- Escambia County Bd. of Educ. v. Benton (S.D. Ala. 2005) 406 F.Supp.2d 1248
- Sen. Rep. No. 108-185
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. 2016090488 v. ORDER DETERMINING
INSUFFICIENCY OF ISSUE THREE
GROSSMONT UNION HIGH SCHOOL OF DUE PROCESS COMPLAINT
DISTRICT.
On September 9, 2016, Parent on behalf of Student filed a due process hearing request1 (complaint), naming Grossmont Union High School District. On September 22, 2016, Grossmont filed a notice of insufficiency as to Issue Three of Student’s complaint.
APPLICABLE LAW
The named parties to a due process hearing request have the right to challenge the sufficiency of the complaint. (20 U.S.C. § 1415(b) & (c).) 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 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. (20 U.S.C.
§ 1415(b)(7)(A)(ii)(III) & (IV).) 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. (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.” (Sen. Rep. No. 108-185, 1 A request for a due process hearing under Education Code section 56502 is the due process complaint notice required under title 20 U.S.C. section 1415(b)(7)(A).
supra, at p. 34.) 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. (Alexandra R. ex rel. Burke v. Brookline School Dist. (D.N.H., Sept. 10, 2009, CIV. 06-CV-0215-JL) 2009 WL 2957991[nonpub. opn.]; Escambia County Bd. 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, 8:04CV2657T24EAJ) 2005 WL 2850076 [nonpub. opn.]; but cf. M.S.-G v. Lenape Regional High School Dist. Bd. of Educ. (3d Cir. 2009) 306 Fed.Appx.
772, 775 [nonpub. opn.].) Whether the complaint is sufficient is a matter within the sound discretion of the Administrative Law Judge. (Assistance to States for the Educ. of Children with Disabilities & Preschool Grants for Children with Disabilities (Aug. 14, 2006) 71 FR 46,540-46541, 46699.)
DISCUSSION
Student alleges three claims in her complaint. Grossmont’s notice of insufficiency relates to only one of the three claims. Specifically, Grossmont asserts the third claim that “The District failed to provide [a free appropriate public education] by denying more vocational opportunities for my child to experience,” is insufficient. Grossmont argues that this claim does not contain sufficient supporting facts, basic information, and a sufficient description of the nature of the problem to be deemed sufficiently pled.
While the complaint does contain a description of the nature of the problem, Student does not allege sufficient facts relating to the problem or provide basic information to provide Grossmont with an awareness and understanding of the issues forming the basis of the complaint as to this claim. The complaint fails to provide any basic facts or information about the services or supports Student requires relating to vocational opportunities; why Student requires these services and/or supports to receive a FAPE; and when the services and/or supports should have been offered. This claim is insufficiently pled.
A parent who is not represented by an attorney may request that the Office of Administrative Hearings provide a mediator to assist the parent in identifying the issues and proposed resolutions that must be included in a complaint. (Ed. Code, § 56505.) Parents are encouraged to contact OAH for assistance if they intend to amend their due process hearing request.
ORDER
1. Issue 3 of Student’s complaint is insufficiently pled under section title 20
United States Code 1415(c)(2)(D).
2. Student shall be permitted to file an amended complaint under title 20 United
States Code section 1415(c)(2)(E)(i)(II).2
3. The amended complaint shall comply with the requirements of title 20 U.S.C.
section 1415(b)(7)(A)(ii), and shall be filed not later than 14 days from the date of this order.
4. If Student fails to file a timely amended complaint, the hearing shall proceed
only on Issues 1 and 2 of Student’s complaint.
DATE: September 27, 2016
DENA COGGINS
Administrative Law Judge Office of Administrative Hearings 2 The filing of an amended complaint will restart the applicable timelines for a due process hearing.