California OAH special education order · December 20, 2017
Determination of Sufficiency of Due Process Complaint
OAH Case No. 2017120238 · ALJ Tara Doss
OAH found Student's complaint sufficient because it described Solano County's alleged failure to provide a sign language interpreter or captioning, exclusion from field trips, and limits on Parent participation, with proposed remedies.
Summary
Solano County Office of Education filed a notice of insufficiency challenging Student's due process complaint. The complaint alleged that, since August 28, 2015, Solano County did not provide a sign language interpreter or real-time captioning, alienated Student in class because of behavior, left Student out of community-based field trips, and did not allow Parent to participate in Student's program. Student asked for an American Sign Language afterschool program, tutoring, transportation reimbursement, and a home-to-school communication system. OAH found the complaint described the problems, gave supporting facts, and proposed resolutions, so it was sufficient, and all dates were confirmed.
Why it matters
A short complaint written without a lawyer can still be sufficient if it names the problems, gives basic facts, and says what remedy the family wants, because OAH reads complaints liberally. The order also shows OAH can fix a complaint's procedural problems on its own: it reissued its scheduling order to name the correct agency.
Key authority cited
- 20 U.S.C. § 1415(b)(7)(A)
- 20 U.S.C. § 1415(c)
- Sen. Rep. No. 108-185
- 71 FR 46540-46541, 46699
- Escambia County Bd. 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. 2017120238 v. DETERMINATION OF SUFFICIENCY
OF DUE PROCESS COMPLAINT
SOLANO COUNTY OFFICE OF
EDUCATION.
On December 5, 2017, Student filed a Due Process Hearing Request with the Office of Administrative Hearings. Student’s complaint did not name a particular party but included an address for the party to be named. On December 7, 2017, OAH issued a scheduling order that incorrectly identified Fairfield-Suisun Unified School District as the responding party. On December 13, 2017, OAH issued an amended scheduling order, correctly identifying Solano County Office of Education as the responding party. On December 18, 2017, Solano County 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. (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, 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’s complaint alleges Solano County impeded Student from receiving a FAPE from August 28, 2015 to the present. Specifically, the complaint alleges Solano County did not provide Student with a sign language interpreter or real-time captioning in the classroom.
The complaint further alleges Student was alienated in the classroom due to behavior and was not included in community-based field trips. Finally, the complaint alleges Solano County did not allow Parent participation in Student’s educational program. To resolve the issues, Student seeks an American Sign Language afterschool program, tutoring, transportation reimbursement, and a home-to-school communication system.
Student’s complaint contains a description of the problems relating to the provision of FAPE to Student, facts relating to the problems, and proposed resolutions of the problems.
Moreover, the complaint contains sufficient information to allow Solano County to prepare for and participate in a resolution session, mediation, and due process hearing. Therefore, Student’s complaint is sufficient.
ORDER
1. Student’s 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 20, 2017
TARA DOSS
Administrative Law Judge Office of Administrative Hearings