California OAH special education order · March 12, 2018
Order of Determination of Sufficiency of Due Process Complaint
OAH Case No. 2018030123 · ALJ Jackie C. Dai
OAH found Student's complaint sufficient, ruling that its three claims (child find, IEP offer, and eligibility) and supporting facts gave the District enough notice to respond and prepare for resolution and mediation.
Summary
The District filed a Notice of Insufficiency challenging Student's due process complaint. The complaint alleged that, from the 2016-2017 school year to the present, the District denied Student a free appropriate public education (FAPE) by failing to meet its child find duties, failing to offer an IEP that provided a FAPE, and failing to find Student eligible. Student alleged deficits in academics and emotional functioning tied to Tourette's Syndrome, Obsessive/Compulsive Disorder, and Anxiety Disorder, and referenced District assessments and an October 26, 2016 IEP team meeting. Applying the liberal pleading standard, OAH found the issues, facts, and proposed resolutions adequate and kept all scheduled dates.
Why it matters
A complaint does not need to be detailed to survive a sufficiency challenge. Naming the claims, the time period, the disabilities, the key events such as assessment and IEP meeting dates, and the remedies wanted is usually enough under the liberal standard OAH applies.
Key authority cited
- 20 U.S.C. § 1415(b)(7)(A)
- Ed. Code § 56502
- Sen. Rep. No. 108-185
- Escambia County Bd. of Educ. v. Benton (S.D. Ala. 2005) 406 F.Supp.2d 1248
- 71 FR 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. 2018030123 v. ORDER OF DETERMINATION OF
SUFFICIENCY OF DUE PROCESS
SAN MATEO UNION HIGH SCHOOL COMPLAINT
DISTRICT .
On March 2, 2018 Student filed a Due Process Hearing Request1 (complaint) with the Office of Administrative Hearings naming San Mateo Union High School (District). On March 9, 2018, 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. (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 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).
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
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 is fifteen years old. Student resides with his parents within District and attends tenth grade at a District school. In sum, the complaint alleges District failed to provide a free appropriate public education from the 2016-2017 school year until present by: (1) failing to meet its Child Find duties; (2) failing to offer an IEP that constitutes a FAPE; and (3) failing to find Student eligible for an IEP.
Student alleges he has deficits in academics and emotional functioning and disabilities relating to Tourette’s Syndrome, Obsessive/Compulsive Disorder and Anxiety Disorder.
Student further alleges that District completed assessments and held an IEP team meeting on October 26, 2016.
Student’s proposed resolutions include: (1) an IEP that provides counseling sessions and academic lessons in a small environment with homework accommodations that allows him to receive credit once he has demonstrated mastery of a topic; (2) compensatory education from October 26, 2016 to present; and (3) reimbursement for all parental costs associated with provided him appropriate educational services necessary for him to receive a
FAPE.
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 and mediation.
Therefore, Student’s statement of the three claims 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: March 12, 2018
JACKIE C. DAI
Administrative Law Judge Office of Administrative Hearings