California OAH special education order · April 15, 2019
Order Determining Due Process Complaint Sufficient
OAH Case No. 2019040518 · ALJ Brian H. Krikorian
OAH found Student's complaint sufficient because it identified two challenged IEPs, listed seventeen specific problems, and proposed seven resolutions, giving Redlands Unified enough notice to respond.
Summary
Redlands Unified filed a notice of insufficiency challenging Student's due process complaint. The complaint alleged that an April 2017 IEP (amended May 2017) and a January 2018 amended IEP failed to offer a FAPE in the least restrictive environment. It listed seven and ten specific problems under those issues and proposed seven resolutions, including placement alternatives, services, compensatory education, and reimbursement. The ALJ found this enough to put the district on notice, so the complaint was sufficient and all scheduled dates were confirmed.
Why it matters
A complaint that names the specific IEPs at issue, breaks the claims into concrete problems, and lists proposed remedies will likely survive a district's sufficiency challenge. OAH reads these pleading rules liberally.
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. 2019040518 v. ORDER DETERMINING DUE
PROCESS COMPLAINT SUFFICIENT
REDLANDS UNIFIED SCHOOL
DISTRICT.
On April 10, 2019 Parent on behalf of Student (Student) filed a Due Process Hearing Request1 (complaint) with the Office of Administrative Hearings naming Redlands Unified School District. On April 15, 2019, Redlands Unified 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 Redlands Unified on notice of the issues forming the basis of the complaint. Student’s complaint identifies the Student, the age of the Student, the specific school, and the grade level of the Student.
Student’s complaint alleges that the individualized education program dated April 13, 2017 and as amended on May 11, 2017, failed to offer Student a FAPE in the least restrictive environment. Student sets forth seven specific “problems” under this issue. Student alleges that the amended IEP dated January 29, 2018, failed to offer Student a FAPE in the least restrictive environment. Student sets forth another ten specific “problems” under this issue.
A complaint is required to include proposed resolutions to the problem, to the extent known and available to the party at the time. (20 U.S.C. §1415(b)(7)(A)(ii)(IV).) Student sets forth seven resolutions, including placement alternatives, education services and therapy, and compensatory education and reimbursement.
Student’s complaint identifies the issues, adequate related facts about the problems, and specific resolutions to permit Redland Unified to respond to the complaint and participate in a resolution session, mediation or a due process hearing.
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: April 15, 2019
BRIAN H. KRIKORIAN
Administrative Law Judge Office of Administrative Hearings